Gilles, Yes, users are responsible for handling their own PrecisionContexts. The idea behind the Equivalency interface was to provide an easy way to perform "fuzzy" comparisons between objects. The interface itself does not define what the comparison involves. Classes that implement the interface (such as Line and Plane) decide what "fuzzy" means in their particular case. All of the current implementations of this interface contain a requirement that PrecisionContexts used by the compared objects (and used in floating point comparisons in the eq() method itself) be exactly equal in order for the objects to be considered equivalent. This is done to make the operation commutative, so that if "a.eq(b)" is true, then "b.eq(a)" is also true. This is documented on each implementing class.
-Matt ________________________________ From: Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, January 3, 2020 12:56 PM To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> Subject: [Geometry] Class "Equivalency" Hello. I'm wary about making that class part of the public API. I thought that the original idea was that users would be responsible of how they handle the "PrecisionContext". However, it seems that "Equivalency" requires equality of "PrecisionContext" instances (not the "double" value). This is non-obvious and IMHO deserves some explanation in the Javadoc and user guide. Regards, Gilles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
