On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Rajaditya Mukherjee < rajaditya.mukherjee@gmail.com> wrote:
Oswin Krause wrote:
We encourage your participation in this review. At a minimum, kindly
state: - Whether you believe the library should be accepted into Boost
Not now, but at a later point surely.
* Conditions for acceptance
This is not because the library is not relevant or useful, or because of bad design, but because it misses important functionality in the current state that would give it impact in the current ecosystem. "If I already have to use two competing point libraries, why should I additionally introduce qvm?" The scope must be broadened by including some advanced algorithms which make qvm useful in the ecosystem, also interoperability with already existing boost components must be established. Some of its functionality already exists in boost, which makes acceptance as a standalone library
a
bit odd. It could be worthwhile to merge qvm with another geometry related boost library to strengthen the links between the libraries.
Thanks!
Do you vote for conditional acceptance under the condition that in addition to basic operations also more advanced algorithms should be implemented in the future? Or that the library shouldn't be accepted at this point? Emil are you willing to extend the scope of the library?
Hi Adam, I believe that since this library specifically targets operations in geometric spaces in 2/3/4d, advanced operations are out of the scope for this library. It is my understanding (and I may be very wrong here since Oswin is a much more senior member of this community than me) that QVM supports all the operations that I would currently expect from it - it is not a substitute for uBLAS since uBLAS is a complete linear algbera library with solvers and advanced matrix functionalities. QVM caters to the graphics community with support for operations like swizzling which I often use when I am working with GLSL shaders(the client ops.). Just like I use glm and eigen in my current projects, I can envision people using QVM and uBLAS in a similar fashion with one complementing the other.
Rajaditya, I really appreciate this comment, you're absolutely right about the scope of QVM, this is not a generic linear algebra library, though it also isn't "yet another 3D graphics math library" either -- its more appropriate to think of it as a meeting place for the many other such libraries that exist already, since medium- and large-scale programs tend to use multiple Q, V and M types coming from several different APIs. That said, and to reply to Adam's question, I believe that Oswin does have a point, it may be appropriate to broaden the scope to include functionality that's used in 3D applications other than graphics. Emil