[mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch

Thu Feb 20 17:04:46 GMT 2020

Hi Ticker,

patch is commited. It is a bit difficult for me because you change a lot of things and the unit test fails.
I just want to make sure that we have something testable in the end.
It is already difficult enough to understand what is documented.

I think the tests are not always working because the result of Coord.makeBetweenPoint is rounded. That means a point calculated with it is typically not ON the line between the given points. A possible solution would be to change all the code in IsInUtil to use double
values and rewrite e.g. makeBetweenPoint and the other used methods to keep the double precision. Still, it might fail when java area code comes in because that always uses a flat earth calculation.
When I understood that I felt indeed a bit relunctant.

Gerd

________________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 20. Februar 2020 17:45
An: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch

Hi Gerd

I don't think the test data 'expected' values are wrong, it is just
that they are more specific than the 'method' mechanism allows to be
differentiated; eg a polygon can only be tested for ALL in or ANY in.

At the moment I feel you have a reluctance about the whole concept of
the methods. Once the principle is accepted, I'll go through the test
data and add, as another tag, the list of methods that should match the
element, then change the test driver to check that these match and the
other applicable methods don't.

Reg. b14: It isn't the stop-early code that causes the problems,
isLineInShape is not giving the correct answer for a simple polygon
produced by the MP cutter.

It would be quite easy to introduce some POLYGON 'on' methods, that
match the outer, inner or either edge of a polygon, but maybe this
could wait until there is a call for it.

Next mail:
I'll change the sentence as you suggest.

Please can you commit the patch as it stands; it has a lot of good
stuff in it. Then I can do the IsInUtilTest and test data changes as
the next stage. It's also handy to see how the Style Manual looks after
each build into the download area, because I don't know how to generate
it and am just guessing at the formatting.

Thank you
Ticker

On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 15:41 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> Hi Ticker,
>
> I see that you overwrite the expected value stored in the test data
> in the unit test. Please don't do this. If you think that the
> expected value in is-in-samples.osm
> is wrong we should discuss the test data.
> In my eyes b14 clearly has points on the edge (as it is part of the
> edge) and is out.
>
> If you think the expected results are correct but your new code
> doesn't allow to test them because of the early stop code please add
> a new tag to each object or maybe create a new  file. The unit test
> file is meant to document what the code does.
>
> Gerd
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag
> von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 20. Februar 2020 14:11
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch
>
> Hi Gerd
>
> Here is a replacement for is_in-function_v10.patch with the
> additions:
>
> - method ..,none)=true to replace ..,any_in_or_on)=false.
>
> - revised documentation.
>
> - detection of holes within the rule.polygon. Will set OUT, ie stop
> 'all' being true, and, if exactly ON, not set IN, ie stop 'any' being
> true.
>
> - removal the kind parameters and related logic from IsInUtil; the
> IsInFunction driver has better understanding of how POLYGON
> processing
> should differ from POLYLINE.
>
> - restructure the MethodArg enum to include all the method dependent
> logic.
>
> Test case b14 (rule.polygon being the hole in the multiPolygon)
> should be OUT, or maybe OUT|ON but the test driver only understands
> ALL
> or ANY for polygons. It still fails because isLineInShape returns
> IN|ON|OUT for the rule.polygon against one of the cut simple
> polygons,
> where it should be ON|OUT
>
> Ticker
>
> On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 00:23 -0700, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > Ticker Berkin wrote
> > > I suggest replacing ANY_IN_OR_ON with SOME_OUT_NONE_IN, giving it
> > > the
> > > method string "none", like SOME_IN_NONE_OUT is referenced as
> > > "all".
> >
> > Yes, much better.
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from:
> > http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Mkgmap-Development-f5324443.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev