Talk:Convex hull: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 67: Line 67:
It should be
It should be


int t = hLen + 1;

for (i = len - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
int t = hLen + 1;
for (i = len - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
while (hLen >= t)
while (hLen >= t)
hptr = h;
hptr = h;
while (hptr->next->next != NULL){
hptr = hptr->next;
while (hptr->next->next != NULL){
}
hptr = hptr->next;
if (ccw(&hptr->next->data, &hptr->data, &p[i])) {
}
break;
if (ccw(&hptr->next->data, &hptr->data, &p[i])) {
}
break;
}




Line 85: Line 84:
: P.S. please sign your comments on the talk pages, using <nowiki>--~~~~</nowiki>. This helps readers comprehend talk pages. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 21:07, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
: P.S. please sign your comments on the talk pages, using <nowiki>--~~~~</nowiki>. This helps readers comprehend talk pages. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 21:07, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


I'm sure of these errors because I tried this code for an exercice on Codingame (Encounter Surface) and I didn't get the good results.
:I'm sure of these errors because I tried this code for an exercice on Codingame (Encounter Surface) and I didn't get the good results.
I compare with C++ and Java codes, found the mistakes, correct then as I explain and now it works !
:I compare with C++ and Java codes, found the mistakes, correct then as I explain and now it works !
May be the code is correct for the data given but it's wrong !
:May be the code is correct for the data given but it's wrong !
[[User:Trap D|Trap D]] ([[User talk:Trap D|talk]])
Trap D

Revision as of 23:45, 22 December 2020

I found some errors in the C code when I compare with c++ code : code C++

   // lower hull
   for (const auto& pt : p) {
       while (h.size() >= 2 && !ccw(h.at(h.size() - 2), h.at(h.size() - 1), pt)) {
           h.pop_back();
       }
       h.push_back(pt);
   }


code C :

  /* lower hull */
   for (i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
       while (hLen >= 2) {
           hptr = h;
           while (hptr->next->next != NULL) {
               hptr = hptr->next;
           }
           if (ccw(&hptr->data, &hptr->next->data, &p[i])) { <== mistake
               break;
           }

It should be

  /* lower hull */
   for (i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
       while (hLen >= 2) {
           hptr = h;
           while (hptr->next->next != NULL) {
               hptr = hptr->next;
           }
           if (ccw(&hptr->next->data, &hptr->data, &p[i])) {   <==== good code
               break;
           }

The same error is done in upper hull


Another error

C++ code

   // upper hull
   auto t = h.size() + 1;
   for (auto it = p.crbegin(); it != p.crend(); it = std::next(it)) {
       auto pt = *it;
       while (h.size() >= t && !ccw(h.at(h.size() - 2), h.at(h.size() - 1), pt)) {
           h.pop_back();
       }
       h.push_back(pt);
   }

C code

   /* upper hull */
                            <== t is fogotten
   for (i = len - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
       while (hLen >= 2) {
           hptr = h;
           while (hptr->next->next != NULL) {
               hptr = hptr->next;
           }
           if (ccw(&hptr->data, &hptr->next->data, &p[i])) {
               break;
           }

It should be

   int t = hLen + 1;
   for (i = len - 1; i >= 0; i--)	{
   while (hLen >= t) 
   	hptr = h;
       while (hptr->next->next != NULL){
           hptr = hptr->next;
       }
       if (ccw(&hptr->next->data, &hptr->data, &p[i]))	{
           break;
       }


You should test the code, and think about the results here. For example, "ccw" is a routine which determines whether the winding is clockwise or counterclockwise. But from which side? Anyways... since that's not a documented issue... ccw should work regardless of the winding direction -- as long as the winding direction is consistent. So... you have encountered a real issue here. But it's probably not a code correctness issue -- it's probably a lack of adequate documentation issue (which is a frequent problem for coders).
Similarly, on the second issue you brought up, just throwing code out -- without any documentation and without any test results -- does not adequately illustrate the issue.
That said, taking a close look at the implementation, like you have done here, is great. We all-too-often have had errors in code here on this site -- often for very understandable reasons. So double checking results is frequently a good thing. Thanks!
P.S. please sign your comments on the talk pages, using --~~~~. This helps readers comprehend talk pages. --Rdm (talk) 21:07, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm sure of these errors because I tried this code for an exercice on Codingame (Encounter Surface) and I didn't get the good results.
I compare with C++ and Java codes, found the mistakes, correct then as I explain and now it works !
May be the code is correct for the data given but it's wrong !

Trap D (talk)