Transform point using localToSceneTransform

Martin Desruisseaux martin.desruisseaux at
Wed Jul 25 18:52:12 PDT 2012

Hello Jim

Le 26/07/12 03:19, Jim Graham a écrit :
> You claim that we need to add new methods if we treat a point as if it 
> were a vector, but we would have to do that anyway to add methods that 
> take vector.

Maybe the intend was to said "new method names", given that lazy guys 
like me sometime like to remember only one name and let the compiler 
figure out the actual method from the parameter type? Just my 2 cents, 
since I'm neutral on the Vector class vs method name issue.

> Furthermore, an array of doubles does not have an "am I a set of 
> points or vectors" type attached to it so we do need to have 2 
> different method names for the methods that take arrays of doubles, 
> whether or not we create a Vector class (whose sole purpose is to 
> indicate that its values which are identical in nature to the Point 
> class are to be considered as magnitudes).

Given that the methods expecting array of doubles were proposed for 
performance reasons when transforming thousands of points, and given 
that it seems to me that transforming thousands of vectors would be a 
less frequent operations, do we need the method expecting arrays for 
delta transforms?


More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list