On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 7:06 AM, Brandon Kohn <blkohn@hotmail.com> wrote:
One of the more useful features of the library (GGL) would of course be the boolean operations. The problem however is clearly going to be robustness.
For some.
I have never encountered a robust floating point boolean operation library in my 9 years of working in the geometry domain. While this may not mean it's impossible, I think it does mean it's unlikely.
I believe that this is because for many use-cases, it isn't worth the run-time performance and development-time trade-off.
I think we've all come to expect that when we adopt a Boost library into our work, it should be correct. I would suggest the requirement that the library authors demonstrate that their algorithm is both correct and robust. We as a community should help define how this is done.
In my application domain, I'm really not that interested in numerical instability due to floating point imprecision. For my use-cases, a few things work fine w/ single precision, and double precision works well for everything else. If you can give me 100% numerical stability without making my code slow, your code clunky to use, or delay release, then great! Jon