Add basic curves

[dhontecillas]

• Added a function to find the minimum distance from a boundvec to a point (can be used to calculate the distance from a platform represented as a boundvec to a target point)
• Added the base class for a tfunction : a base class that for each t value returns a value
  • Added line as a function of t (althought that could be redundant with a more generic representation of a boundvec2 , that can be a line, a segment, or a ray, it uses the same interface than 'function' and you can get the inverse through the solve function)
  • Added tquadratic as function of t (inot used the parabola term, as it will be used for curves )
  • Added tcubic function (not fully tested and not implemented the solve method)
• Added the tcurve2 class : for each provided value of t it returns a vec2.
  • Added the implementation of a parabola, that is the composition of a line in x axis, and a cubic function for the y axis.

The parabolic curve has been fully tested in a project of mine, however, at some point I expect to put some tests.

[Kazade]

Hi! This looks really awesome, the only reason I haven't merged it yet is that I'd prefer if the C++ classes were implemented in terms of C functions, for both consistency, but also because the C library gets more use than the C++ headers (because it's more portable) and so it would benefit more people that way.

I'm obviously not expecting you to do that, when I find some time I'll move the code around. Hope that's OK!

Thanks!

[dhontecillas]

Hi! That code has been around in my disk for a while. I wanted to do some
reorganization before making a pull request ... but, since that was good
for me, never found the time to move the stuff to C functions. I made the
pull request, so perhaps someone can take advantge of if.

Let's do something: send me a line before you want to start moving the
stuff, so if have something else to commit I will do it.

About using it in headers, is more about the 'inline' capabilities of the
compiler. But I'm not sure if it is going to be a big difference between
having the code in the headers or having it in C , and calling it from C++
. But I completely agree that for consistency it should be placed in the C
part of the repo.

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Luke Benstead notifications@github.com
wrote:

Hi! This looks really awesome, the only reason I haven't merged it yet is
that I'd prefer if the C++ classes were implemented in terms of C
functions, for both consistency, but also because the C library gets more
use than the C++ headers (because it's more portable) and so it would
benefit more people that way.

I'm obviously not expecting you to do that, when I find some time I'll
move the code around. Hope that's OK!

Thanks!

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#34 (comment).