-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Sg/in on updates #37
Sg/in on updates #37
Conversation
Sg/update intersects
|
||
test_pairs = [ | ||
# Points and geometries | ||
(pt1, pt1, "pt1", "pt1"), # Same point |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we put these descriptions like "Same point" in thd tuple and print it with the other info?
Amazing I also wanted to do the same reorganisation. Its not a huge issue but usually you want to keep file moves and code changes in separate PRs so the comparisons are side by side here. Its a bit hard to review this. You also want to use And did you mean line-line overlaps should be 1d? Probably LibGEOS is right somehow 😅 |
Okay, I am going to split this into 3 different PRs. I need some of the functionality and I think that is the easier part to merge. It'll also make it easier to review like you said above. |
I think anything of dimension 1 is enough to be overlapping? |
I implemented a generalizable solution for most of the DE-9IM functions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DE-9IM).
The only one not there is
equals
because I already have a better (I think?) way of solving it.I am having issues most with
overlaps
andcrosses
. Right now 3overlaps
tests are failing with regards to LibGEOS comparisons (line-line and line-ring). However, I am not sure I agree with the LibGEOS answer. In the example cases that are failing, the two curves DO overlap, but they also cross on different segments. In the DE-9IM functions guide, it says that for line-line crosses, interactions must be of dimension 1, so I thought that the cross, which creates a point, would exclude this example from passing.Then for
crosses
there is a multi-geometry test failing. LibGEOS says a geometry collectioncrosses
a multi-line string, but none of the individual elements cross so I don't know how that is possible.I am open to debugging these, but I would like to merge this sooner rather than later because I have code that depends on some of this code. I probably should have done this in two PRs or something because it is a lot. Would it make sense maybe to move
overlaps
andcrosses
into a new PR?