[HN Gopher] Geogram: Programming Library with Geometric Algorithms
___________________________________________________________________
Geogram: Programming Library with Geometric Algorithms
Author : cpp_frog
Score : 101 points
Date : 2023-02-11 13:42 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| carterschonwald wrote:
| I've had some very positive interactions with Bruno levy online.
| He's incredibly nice and happy to share his deep domain
| knowledge.
| dima55 wrote:
| This is the thing underlying AliceVision. As far as I can tell it
| was built together with and for AliceVision. It's not a nice,
| standalone library today, and I cannot imagine using it in any
| other way.
| twelvechairs wrote:
| I wish there was a better description of how geometry processing
| libraries differ - what does this do that say, open3d or CGAL
| doesn't?
| yazzku wrote:
| Exactly my thought. If anything I would have merged this into
| CGAL. "30 research articles" is just the tip of the iceberg of
| what CGAL does.
|
| Also, Open3D is looking very cool, good pointer.
| jonas21 wrote:
| CGAL is GPL, while Geogram is BSD. That has a lot of
| practical consequences in how they can be used. Plus it's
| nice from an educational standpoint to have independent open-
| source implementations.
| Const-me wrote:
| The algorithms are awesome. For instance, their Delaunay
| tetrahedralization algorithms are state of the art, in terms of
| both accuracy and performance.
|
| However, software engineering and API design could have been much
| better. That's not quite a library IMO, it's a large OO-based
| framework. Geogram implements stuff like logging, multi-
| threading, reference counting, class factories, memory
| management, asserts, Boolean type, atomics, and more. This makes
| it relatively hard to integrate, especially for Windows OS where
| the OS kernel is very different from all others.
| whatshisface wrote:
| This is an under-discussed problem with C++, the lack of a
| granular package manager leads to huge numbers of what are
| essentially incomplete Boost variants, and not due to the
| developers being bad; Boost is so huge that sometimes it makes
| sense to re-implement 5% of it.
| optrigonian wrote:
| The opaque nature of all the machine learning today has made me
| appreciate analytic algorithms more. For a number of years I've
| been exploring 2D representation using triangulations [1].
| Working with analytic algorithms is like playing around with
| synthesizers whereas ML is more like using a sampler.
|
| [1] https://github.com/mpihlstrom/femton
| xtrgz wrote:
| Do you have plans for a license? Impressive either way.
| optrigonian wrote:
| Thanks. A license has been added now.
| Blackthorn wrote:
| > Working with analytic algorithms is like playing around with
| synthesizers whereas ML is more like using a sampler.
|
| Amazing analogy that really helps me understand these
| algorithms better. Thanks for that.
| mxmlnkn wrote:
| I love the ReadMe of your project. It is like the other extreme
| when compared with Geogram. I tried to find out what Geogram
| was about and what it does better but I lost interest before I
| could find out. The ReadMe needs some work and the wiki didn't
| seem much better at first glance. You already have to know what
| you are looking before using Geogram.
| optrigonian wrote:
| Thanks. I have a low attention span with GitHub repos, so I
| felt I should at least try to meet the expectations of
| someone like myself.
| antegamisou wrote:
| See also libigl for geometric processing:
|
| https://libigl.github.io/
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-02-11 23:00 UTC)