|
From: | John Swensen |
Subject: | Re: GSoC 16: Sample implementation for ispolycw function |
Date: | Wed, 23 Mar 2016 13:59:05 -0700 |
1) I would think that we would only want to include one library dependency to implement all the missing polygon functionality. Otherwise, you would have to spend a lot of effort learning two different libraries and how to convert between their vertex representations. 2) I think the best way to contribute code is to make sure it is complete. For example don’t include things like “TODO: Check if arguments are valid” when it is a pretty easy task to go ahead and perform those checks. Once you think it is ready, I would submit a Bug Report marked as a Feature Request to the GNU Octave Savannah project and then attach the file to the bug report. Two other comments: I would definitely mention in your proposal that you are at the point when you can compile external functions against the Octave libraries and the Boost libraries and implemented one of the more simple polygon functions. Also, you should look more carefully at how the tests were written in the link I gave you. You should follow the pattern they used to include “assert” statements that will let the automated test system know whether the tests succeeded or failed. John S. |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |