[mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch

Mon Feb 24 14:52:52 GMT 2020

Hi Ticker,

I think what I tried to point out is that we have lost some precision reg. the unit tests. On the other hand you are probably right that it doesn't matter for the mkgmap user.

Gerd

________________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
Gesendet: Montag, 24. Februar 2020 14:54
An: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch

Hi Gerd

It isn't really a problem of the test driver; it is a consequence of
not having a method that distinguishes between an inner line that
touches the edge and one that doesn't, ditto for outer lines.

If there is a strong case for methods that do distinguish these cases
and they get implemented, then the new methods just needed to be added
to the allLineMethods list and expected #1 and #4 maps. Then the tests
will fail if you swap 1 & 3 or 4 & 6.

Ticker

On Mon, 2020-02-24 at 13:11 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> Hi Ticker,
>
> see r4457.
>
> I see one potential problem with your test driver:
> It does not always find a problem when the expected value in the test
> data is wrong. E.g. when I change the expected value for w2 from 1 to
> the wrong value 3 the test doesn't fail.
>
> Gerd
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag
> von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
> Gesendet: Montag, 24. Februar 2020 13:50
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Work on is_in branch
>
> Hi Gerd
>
> Patch attached that:
>
> - rewords the sentence is the Style Manual and changes the
> highlighting; I need to check the next build/download to see if this
> is clearer.
>
> - fixes polygon 'any' method to also return true if exactly ON.
>
> - merge polygons for 'any' so that line on shared boundary is "in"
> rather than "on".
>
> - change the test driver to try all methods relevant to the element,
> checking they return true/false as appropriate. I decided that,
> rather than introducing a new tag saying which methods should match,
> it was clearer to use the 'expected' tag value as a description of
> how the element interacted with the polygons and generate the methods
> that should match from this and the non-matching from a list if all
> methods.
>
> Ticker
>
> On Thu, 2020-02-20 at 16:45 +0000, Ticker Berkin wrote:
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev