- From: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:53:45 -0700
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
Sent from my iPhone On Mar 21, 2013, at 11:39 AM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. That sounds weird. Users would actually never be able to rely on the matrix values and would need a sanity check of the matrix the whole time. Note that this is not at all the case for current implementations nor graphic libraries. Dirk > > ~TJ >
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2013 18:54:52 UTC