2006/4/14, David Feuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Does scm/guile not have such funtions for pairs/complex vectors?It probably does support complex numbers. Complex numbers, however,are conceptually quite different from 2D vectors, and I don't feelcomfortable conflating them. It's up to you and Han, o
Hi,
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, David Feuer wrote:
> As I said, I'm not going to be working on any LilyPond this month, but I
> think the best of those is vector-2d, which has the problems of being
> too long and too easily confused with Scheme vectors. Whatever.
Well, maybe when you come back, ther
On 4/15/06, Carl D. Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As far as Lilypond is concerned, I don't think most of them _are_ vectors.
> The points I've used in developing stencils _have_ been points (e.g. bounding
> box corners) I guess in your work with ps, there may be more vector stuff.
> I
d, or vector-xy.
Carl
From: David Feuer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 4/14/2006 5:21 PM
To: Carl D. Sorensen
Cc: Jan Nieuwenhuizen; lily-devel
Subject: Re: 2D vector code
On 4/14/06, Carl D. Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> After rev
On 4/14/06, Carl D. Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> After reviewing what the scheme code would look like if we used complex
> numbers, and thinking about the benefits of having nice names for data
> types and procedures, I think I agree that we ought to have our own
> coordinate pair type
David Feuer wrote:
---
The complex numbers form a field. The 2-D vectors don't. A complex
number suggests that the real and imaginary components are of a
different nature, whereas 2-D vectors are symmetrical in their
components. Vectors could be implemented using comple
> The complex numbers form a field. The 2-D vectors don't. A complex
> number suggests that the real and imaginary components are of a
> different nature, whereas 2-D vectors are symmetrical in their
> components. Vectors could be implemented using complex numbers, but I
> think identifying them
On 4/14/06, Carl D. Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Actually, complex numbers are nothing more than 2-D vectors, but in the
> real-imaginary plane rather than the x-y plane. In fact, when we use
> complex numbers, we draw them in a plane indistinguishable from x-y
> (real is x, imaginary i
David Feuer writes
>On 4/13/06, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> David Feuer writes:
>
>> In C++ we have Offset, which has a number of complex_* functions. We
>> also have complex-to-offset and use offset pairs in SCM, but I do not
>> know if we have any such functions in SCM.
>
On 4/13/06, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Feuer writes:
> In C++ we have Offset, which has a number of complex_* functions. We
> also have complex-to-offset and use offset pairs in SCM, but I do not
> know if we have any such functions in SCM.
I don't either.
> Does scm/g
David Feuer writes:
> My SVG polygon code uses 2D vectors ( (x,y) pairs ) a good bit. Does
> LilyPond already have basic functions (addition, subtraction,
> multiplication by a scalar, dot product, cross product, ...) for
> vectors I can use?
In C++ we have Offset, which has a number of complex_
I should have mentioned that I don't know yet how C++ code interacts
with SRFI 9 records, if that's feasible at all. I'm sure C++ can
interact with native Guile records, but I'm not sure I really want to
deal with those.
David
___
lilypond-devel maili
My SVG polygon code uses 2D vectors ( (x,y) pairs ) a good bit. Does
LilyPond already have basic functions (addition, subtraction,
multiplication by a scalar, dot product, cross product, ...) for
vectors I can use? If not, I think I should probably write them as a
separate module. If I write the
13 matches
Mail list logo
