[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposal for the geometric engine, RFC

> ...
> All this mean we will need less classes to describe all the geometric
> object:
> 	geometricObject	
> 	 +-point+
> 	 |	|
> 	 |	+-freePoint
> 	 |	+-freePontOnCurve		
> 	 |	+-intersectionPoint
> 	 |	+-transformedPoint
> 	 +-line
> 	 +-halfLine
> 	 +-segment
> 	 +-circle
> 	 +-arcCircle
> 	 +-locus
> 	 +-vector

Considering your other comments, surely you mean:
 	geometricObject	
 	 +-point+
 	 |	|
 	 |	+-freePoint
 	 |	+-freePontOnCurve		
 	 |	+-intersectionPoint
 	 |	+-transformedPoint
 	 +-curve+
	 |	|
	 |	+-line
	 |	+-halfLine
 	 |	+-segment
	 |	+-circle
	 |	+-arcCircle
	 |	+-locus
 	 +-vector

Sounds good, though I wonder if you won't have to eventually make the
"vector" into a more general "transformation" (reflection, rotation,
translation [= vector], ...) class.

Best,
	Dylan Thurston