On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote: > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Karl Tomlinson < > karlt+public-audio@karlt.net> wrote > >> Would it make sense to have setOrientation() throw an exception if >> any the vectors are zero or otherwise linearly dependent? >> >> It is not possible to determine appropriate panning parameters in >> these situations, and the azimuth and elevation from the >> calculation in [1] become undefined because an attempt is made to >> normalize a zero vector. >> >> If the orientation is not known, then I think it would be better >> to retain the previous orientation than to suddenly change to some >> default orientation. Throwing an exception seems the appropriate >> way to indicate that a setter method was not successful in >> changing anything. >> > > > With 2D canvas we decided it was better to not throw for singularities > because you don't want to break the application when it's doing some > animation that passes through a singularity. I think the same logic applies > here. So I suggest just silently ignoring the setOrientation call. > That makes sense to me. -- Ehsan <http://ehsanakhgari.org/>
Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2013 16:37:10 UTC