On Monday, August 22, 2022 at 12:04:57 PM UTC+9 Travis Scrimshaw wrote: > I am not sure how much I support that because there is no metric. >
It is of course euclidean, as you say > you can do > > sage: l = line3d([(1,2,3), (4,5,6)]) > sage: V = RR^3 > sage: (V(l.points[1]) - V(l.points[0])).norm() > 5.19615242270663 > My point is to attach methods to graphics objects for handy computation. I am not sure if this is technically doable. > There could also be other natural interpretations of length here, such as > the number of (non-colinear) segments. > (1) .length() could be an alias of .line3d_euclidean_length() as this is most useful. (2) .line3d_combinatorial_length(): I doubt if this is useful for drawing. Is this more pedagogical or are you using 3d line segments in some > meaningful way? > Pedagogical and meaningful :) I thought of this idea while drawing graphics to prepare lecture notes for a class next semester. If graphics objects get more powered, then drawing (2d or 3d) mathematical pictures, which is always difficult, would get less difficult. For another example, we may implement a method to compute the intersection point given two line segments (as tikz can do in latex) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/27ce1283-6d5d-4921-894c-d1043d299b5cn%40googlegroups.com.
