Add binary convex_hull method to API module
#3662
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I think we should keep For the unary, lazy convex hull, we could define: |
schillic
force-pushed
the
schillic/convex_hull
branch
from
c4a1828 to
dd0607f
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As an alternative to this PR, I was wondering whether we should remove the binary
convex_hullmethod from the library.The convex hull is traditionally defined for a single set. Originally, there was no way to express unions of two sets, but now we can express that via a
UnionSet. So it feels a bit arbitrary that we offer this binary method.A similar argument goes for the lazy binary operation
ConvexHull, which could be turned into a unary operation.