Hello.

2020-01-20 20:39 UTC+01:00, Matt Juntunen <matt.juntu...@hotmail.com>:
> Gilles,
>
>> I was not indicating that the name "EuclideanTransform" would be
>> better than "AffineTransform", I was wondering about whether the
>> class itself is redundant.
>
> Oh, I misunderstood. The "EuclideanTransform" interface is important because
> it adds the "applyVector(Vector)" method, which has different behavior than
> the standard "apply" method. All transforms in the euclidean packages have
> this method but it is not present in the core Transform because not all
> spaces have associated Vector types (eg, spherical). I had renamed it
> AffineTransform in the previous PR not because it exposed new functionality
> or behavior that made it affine, but because it was located in a module
> defining an affine space. What do you suggest for the name here?

I guess that "EuclideanTransform" is fine (as an extension of the
functionality not the requirements of being "affine").

Regards,
Gilles

>
> [...]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Reply via email to