Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It comes back to bite you in a hurry. You don't need arbitrary precision to represent arbitrarily small things but to not have algorithms break down. Simple things like "is p inside the polygon" changes from true to false by moving both point and polygon 1 unit to the right. See under the heading "geometric predicates can FAIL" here http://groups.csail.mit.edu/graphics/classes/6.838/S98/meeti...

You are right that this happens only in edge cases. But you don't want that in a cad program if you have anything doing e.g point-in-polygon, triangulation or other such algorithms.

I know from experience that you really should bake this into the very foundation of a cad package (if you see 2003 me, let him know)



The link didn't work when I tried it. I found "Robust Predicates and Degeneracy" with a search: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/graphics/classes/6.838/S98/meeti...


Thanks, not sure why my iOS clipboard pasted a link I copied a week ago... (corrected the link now)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: