QgsAbstrcatGeometry and childs: Add fuzzyEqual and fuzzyDistanceEqual. Replaces operator== with fuzzyEqual and uses epsilon=1E-8 #55648
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lbartoletti
force-pushed
the
qgsabstractgeometry_fuzzyequal
branch
2 times, most recently
from
6966b16
to
ecb8af3
Compare
lbartoletti
changed the title
|
The QGIS project highly values your contribution and would love to see this work merged! Unfortunately this PR has not had any activity in the last 14 days and is being automatically marked as "stale". If you think this pull request should be merged, please check
|
github-actions
bot
added
the
stale
lbartoletti
added
API
nyalldawson
reviewed
Jan 10, 2024
nyalldawson
reviewed
Jan 10, 2024
…. Replaces operator== with fuzzyEqual and uses epsilon=1E-8 The comparisons among QGIS were conducted on coordinates using a fixed epsilon: specifically, 1e-8 for QgsPoint and the default value for qgsDoubleNear: 4 * DBL_EPSILON. Initially, I've standardized its use to 1e-8 universally; it's already significantly adequate for our Cartesian cases (1e-3 should suffice for many), potentially fitting just right for geographical contexts. Furthermore, in response to precision concerns, we're using the fuzzyEqual and fuzzyDistanceEqual methods. These methods enable users/developers to compare geometries more easily and with a given precision. The API remains intact as operator==/equals() have been shifted into fuzzyEqual (with an epsilon of 1e-8). To consolidate the code between fuzzyEqual and fuzzyDistanceEqual, helper functions, fuzzyHelpers, have been introduced following the logic of the respective segments to be executed.
…ollection, QgsPolygon, QgsMultiPoint, QgsMultiPolygon, QgsCompoundCurve
…ert not geom1 == geom2
lbartoletti
force-pushed
the
qgsabstractgeometry_fuzzyequal
branch
from
ecb8af3
to
4e9b635
Compare
…s a 'distance comparison'
nyalldawson
reviewed
Jan 10, 2024
nyalldawson
reviewed
Jan 10, 2024
nyalldawson
approved these changes
Jan 11, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
The comparisons among QGIS were conducted on coordinates using a fixed epsilon:
specifically, 1e-8 for QgsPoint and the default value for qgsDoubleNear: 4 *
DBL_EPSILON.
Initially, I've standardized its use to 1e-8 universally; it's already
significantly adequate for our Cartesian cases (1e-3 should suffice for many),
potentially fitting just right for geographical contexts.
Furthermore, in response to precision concerns, we're using the fuzzyEqual
and fuzzyDistanceEqual methods. These methods enable users/developers to
compare geometries more easily and with a given precision.
The API remains intact as operator==/equals() have been shifted into fuzzyEqual
(with an epsilon of 1e-8).
To consolidate the code between fuzzyEqual and fuzzyDistanceEqual, helper
functions, fuzzyHelpers, have been introduced following the logic of the
respective segments to be executed.
Side note: epsilon could be a variable, but will not be proposed in this PR.
Followup: #55625