Affine transforms - matrix algebra
Pavel Safrata
pavel.safrata at oracle.com
Tue Jul 17 07:50:19 PDT 2012
I've just realized that the 3x3 matrix is wrong (or at least more
confusing than useful). It would be good for representing a 3D transform
without translation (which we don't really need to do), but not for the
intended representation of 2D transform with translation. So I'm taking
back the addition of MAT_3x3.
Pavel
On 17.7.2012 12:40, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
> Le 17/07/12 12:22, Pavel Safrata a écrit :
>>> At this point, given the increasing amount of methods and the enum,
>>> I wonder if we should replace all those variants by a single method:
>>>
>>> double[] getSubMatrix(int firstRow, int firstColumn, int numRows,
>>> int numColumns, double[] array);
>>>
>> Besides the fact that I don't really like replacing a set of
>> straightforward methods by a single monster, this doesn't really work
>> for all the cases. The 2x3 matrix for instance contains
>>
>> xx xy tx
>> yx yy ty
>>
>> which is, from the full 4x4 matrix, the first, second, and fourth
>> column.
>
> Right, I forgot that case.
>
> Martin
>
More information about the openjfx-dev
mailing list