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
It actually produces the bounding rectangle of points, yet the name does not imply that.
I suggest having separate methods for the inner/outer rectangle produced, and deprecate the original from_points.
cc @nical
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I don't see any other useful way to build a rectangle from a set of points, so I don't think that there is any ambiguity or soundness issue to worry about. But I don't understand what you meant by inner and outer rectangles in this context so I may be missing something.
If you want to rename this into something more specific that's fine by me (I just don't want to do another major euclid bump in all of the servo crates, so deprecating this one first sounds good).
I don't see any other useful way to build a rectangle from a set of points,
What I had in mind is an "inner" rectangle. I.e. when you transform an aligned rectangle, getting 4 points, and would like to find a largest rectangle contained within the transformed region.
Come to think of it now, this implies that the points describe a convex shape, which is a different semantics (more specific one) than the current from_points, so I think leaving the current logic in place is reasonable.
It actually produces the bounding rectangle of points, yet the name does not imply that.
I suggest having separate methods for the inner/outer rectangle produced, and deprecate the original
from_points
.cc @nical
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: