X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<20151027114407.22323.qmail@stuge.se>
Date:	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 12:44:07 +0100
From:	"Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	"Levente \(leventelist AT gmail DOT com\) \[via geda-user AT delorie DOT com\]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] home/bkerin/geometry_module branch
Mail-Followup-To:	"Levente (leventelist AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
References:	<CAC4O8c_0jg9_VbT82H3P7uNi90zg=7O1Bya3ZwPW1MybP-yO9Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CACwWb3CcWkRz9Wnz+tFKTc+PkP8sZEEJ8kJX=08gM28P4RrE7w AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510271032140 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <CACwWb3Cwwe1kVwH62QOgg1yz7xwOfjW6mdiuikDJ9_iNr+8PAw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510271154010 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1510271154010.7137@igor2priv>
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu wrote:
> Do we _really_ have so many, so complex geometry code in PCB that it is 
> worth switching to a lib that brings half million lines of code just in 
> include/?

Yes, that is the important question. I don't think the present PCB
code is a strong reason to pick up a heavy dependency.

The question is whether such a heavy dependency would allow or enable
or at the very least simplify addition of new cool geometry-based
things to pcb. If yes (which seems likely to me) then it's worth
considering.

Maybe there are other candidates too.

Lev, what were the specific nice things about CGAL that caught your
eye, and how would they be useful/helpful in pcb?


//Peter

- Raw text -