W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: comments on Matrix

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:38:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDAwxR5-ouA38g5f6PwuVr3MMeg_0AXTkKC_yg5yyYHf8Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Cc: Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> SVG matrix throws an exception and since this is a drop-in replacement,
> Matrix needs to throw one too :-(

Are we sure about that?  I'd prefer to look at some SVGMatrix-using
code to see if it actually relies on singular matrixes throwing, or if
it just assumes they never will (my assumption) or simply ignores
failure.  If either of the latter, we should feel free to change
behavior.

> Most libraries seem to return a boolean to say that a inversion failed which
> seems better. I *believe* adding an exception to JS also forces the creation
> of an exception object every time which is expensive.

Only if you actually throw it.  It's not eagerly created every call.

> Why don't we add another Inverse:
>
> boolean Inverse(Matrix);
>
> We could also move to unrestricted doubles so we can populate the matrix
> with NaN or Inf if needed.

Yes, that seems fine.

~TJ
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2013 18:39:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 21 March 2013 18:39:12 GMT