[metapost] turningnumber revisited
hartmut_henkel at gmx.de
Thu Jul 7 23:21:52 CEST 2011
On Thu, 7 Jul 2011, laurent at math.toronto.edu wrote:
> A key example of bezier path that may appear as
> segment of a p \in \C+ and not in \C is:
> \b(A,B,C,D) with Casteljau polygon
> A=B --- C
> The derivative vector at the point A=B is zero but
> the direction vector there is the non-null direction
> (C-A) / |C-A| .
> The good news of today is that the turning
> number calculation algorithm I gave for \C on Tue, 28
> Jun 2011 02:40:50 -0400 (EDT) obviously applies to
> Unfortunately, instabilities of turning number
> occur in \C+. For example, the point A=B of the above
> example is a cusp of its maximally extended cubic
> path, and that path can devellop a loop under
> perturbation. Thus *practical* problems for winding
> number calculations remain for paths in \C+.
Can't one be happy that points A=B are _identical_ as any kind of
transform will give at least the same new A'=B' position also
Seems turningnumber is difficult particularly on the numerical side. E.
g., given this harmless example:
prologues := 3;
u = 50mm;
pair a, b, c, d; path p;
a := origin; b = (0.7u, 1u); d = up * 1u;
for i = 0 step 0.03 until 1:
c := i[a,b];
p := a -- b -- c -- d -- cycle;
It shows that even c is not always on the straight line through a and b!
Simply as it ratchets along the numerical staircase between a and b so
that a--b and c--b are not always parallel, and so there can be even a
loop/triangle c -- (exact i[a,b]) -- b -- cycle. And not even Beziers
are involved. How can such cases be tackled?
More information about the metapost