On Sun, 2 Dec 2018 19:20:03 +0000, Matt Juntunen wrote:
Unless anyone objects, I'm going to continue with what I'm working on
I certainly don't object on your working to improve the geometry
code, but wherever that work overlaps with code being worked on
elsewhere (in this case, the "Quaternion" class), then we'd
rather have a discussion happening here first.
with QuaternionRotation and create a merge request. That way, we'll
at
least have a reference implementation and baseline functionality for
commons-geometry that we can modify later based on what's decided
here.
My questions below are a start; I'm waiting for answers.
Code duplication is bad (TM).
Regards,
Gilles
-Matt
________________________________
From: Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 9:40 PM
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Numbers][Geometry] Where to define "quaternion" (Was:
Making Quaternion a VALJO)
On Sat, 01 Dec 2018 12:56:34 +0100, Gilles wrote:
Hello.
On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 06:05:31 +0000, Matt Juntunen wrote:
Hi guys,
FYI, I've been working on a quaternion-related class named
QuaternionRotation for commons-geometry (see link below). It
includes
slerp as well as several other geometry-oriented methods, such as
conversion to/from axis-angle representations and creation from
basis
rotations. It's not quite ready for a merge yet since I still need
to
finish the Euler angle conversions.
I did not use the Quaternion class from commons-numbers since I
wanted to focus solely on using quaternions to represent 3D
rotations.
I felt like the commons-numbers class was too general for this.
We need to explore further how to avoid duplication.
Some questions:
* Should "QuaternionRotation" inherit from "Quaternion"?
* Should "Quaternion" be defined in [Geometry] (and removed from
[Numbers])?
* Are some utilities defined in "QuaternionRotation" general
such that they could be part of the [Numbers] "Quaternion" API.
An example might be the transformation between quaternion and
matrix (represented as a double[3][3])?
The second consideration could apply to any computation that does
not require types defined in [Geometry]. For example, interpolation
is a purely quaternion-internal operation.
s/second/third/
It looks to me that it should be possible to come up with a design
that defines "rotation" in [Geometry] which uses a "quaternion"
defined in [Numbers].
Otherwise, one would wonder why "Complex" is also not in [Geometry]
(for 2D rotations).
Best regards,
Gilles
Regards,
Matt
https://github.com/darkma773r/commons-geometry/blob/transforms/commons-geometry-euclidean/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/geometry/euclidean/threed/QuaternionRotation.java
[https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/3809623?s=400&v=4]<https://github.com/darkma773r/commons-geometry/blob/transforms/commons-geometry-euclidean/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/geometry/euclidean/threed/QuaternionRotation.java>
darkma773r/commons-geometry<https://github.com/darkma773r/commons-geometry/blob/transforms/commons-geometry-euclidean/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/geometry/euclidean/threed/QuaternionRotation.java>
Apache Commons Geometry. Contribute to darkma773r/commons-geometry
development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com
________________________________
From: Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 9:37 AM
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: [numbers] Making Quaternion a VALJO
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:22:45 +0000, Steve Bosman wrote:
> and I have also emailed an ICLA.
Not received/acknowledged yet.
I am now listed on the "Persons with signed CLAs but who are not
(yet)
committers." page.
Welcome!
> I think two convenience divide methods performing qr^{-1} and
r^{-1}q
> for q
> and r would be useful, but I couldn't think of nice names for
them.
What are the use-cases?
Why aren't "multiply" and "inverse" enough?
I must admit I'm new to quaternions and stumbled into the project
while
trying to improve my understanding so I'm not going to claim great
knowledge of how common these operations are. I was primarily
thinking of
Quaternion Interpolation - SLERP and SQUAD. It seems to me that
you
end up
creating inverse instances and throwing them away a lot and I
thought
it
would be good to reduce that overhead.
Surely, the class "Quaternion" is minimal but, before adding to
the API, we be careful to have use-cases for low-level operations.
Those mentioned above seems more high-level, tied to a specific
domain (see also "Commons Geometry", another new component not yet
released) but I may be wrong...
Regards,
Gilles
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
