You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In our kernels, we name everything prefixed with Movetk e.g. MovetkPoint, MovetkLine. This prefix, however, does not really add any value. Would it make sense to simply rename them to Point, Line etc.? This makes using movetk with user defined kernels perhaps easier, since they do not need to use the prefix.
In addition, it may be convenient to add aliases for the geometric objects in the movetk::geom namespace, e.g.
template<typename Kernel>
usingPoint = typename Kernel::Point; //or MovetkPoint, if we decide not to remove the prefix
This makes using these types easier, then you can do movetk::geom::Point<Kernel> instead of typename Kernel::Point. This is similar to how CGAL approaches geometric objects.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In our kernels, we name everything prefixed with
Movetk
e.g.MovetkPoint
,MovetkLine
. This prefix, however, does not really add any value. Would it make sense to simply rename them toPoint
,Line
etc.? This makes using movetk with user defined kernels perhaps easier, since they do not need to use the prefix.In addition, it may be convenient to add aliases for the geometric objects in the
movetk::geom
namespace, e.g.This makes using these types easier, then you can do
movetk::geom::Point<Kernel>
instead oftypename Kernel::Point
. This is similar to how CGAL approaches geometric objects.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: