Re: Delaunay triangulation

I for one would agree you are right on both counts, but to paraphrase Shakespeare, 'Does a problem by any other name solve more sweetly?'

Update: To clarify what I mean: the OP knows the problem and its solution but is looking for the fastest way to achieve it with perl.

One world, one people

Comment on Re: Delaunay triangulation

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Delaunay triangulation by tmoertel (Chaplain) on Aug 03, 2005 at 16:36 UTC
Verily, the problem doth solve more sweetly. For by a common name it is well studied, and we may use the sweet fruits thereof in our pursuits. Tom Moertel : Blog / Talks / CPAN / LectroTest / PXSL / Coffee / Movie Rating Decoder	[reply]
Re^2: Delaunay triangulation by tmoertel (Chaplain) on Aug 03, 2005 at 16:57 UTC
To clarify what I mean: the OP knows the problem and its solution but is looking for the fastest way to achieve it with perl. How do you know what the OP knows and is looking for? Do you have some knowledge beyond what is in the original post? The OP says he is "willing to entertain ideas of differing algorithms." What makes you think otherwise? Cheers, Tom Tom Moertel : Blog / Talks / CPAN / LectroTest / PXSL / Coffee / Movie Rating Decoder	[reply]
Re^2: Delaunay triangulation by runrig (Abbot) on Aug 03, 2005 at 19:39 UTC
I tend to side with tmoertel. I once in ages past implemented my own naive algorithm for this very thing ( O(n^3) or O(n^4), probably the same way that the OP is doing, but in AutoLISP using AutoCAD), and although I knew there must be a better way, I didn't know at the time that just knowing the name Delaunay Triangulation would've helped in finding better algorithms (and it was long before Google and probably before Al Gore invented the internet). I've since been unable to find the time to implement this in perl :-( There was a start made on this in perl utilizing a C library, but all I see is a readme file.	[reply]


Don't ask to ask, just ask
	PerlMonks