Closed pmur002 closed 5 years ago
Merging #13 into master will decrease coverage by
0.05%
. The diff coverage is72.72%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #13 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 63.72% 63.66% -0.06%
==========================================
Files 6 6
Lines 2994 3003 +9
==========================================
+ Hits 1908 1912 +4
- Misses 1086 1091 +5
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/init.c | 100% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
R/clipper.R | 87.41% <100%> (+0.08%) |
:arrow_up: |
src/interface.cpp | 85.01% <66.66%> (-0.59%) |
:arrow_down: |
src/clipper.h | 75% <0%> (-15%) |
:arrow_down: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a49b993...64108b1. Read the comment docs.
I see from the nice code coverage report that I should probably have added an example to the documentation (?). Happy to do that if required.
Excellent. Thank you! I wlil merge this later today. A
Awesome. Thanks!
Hi
For my 'gridGeometry' package, I created a fork of 'polyclip' that could work with "open" shapes (lines) as well as (closed) polygons.
Would you consider adding this to the real 'polyclip' ?
I have tried to make the patch low-impact (and you can ignore the DESCRIPTION file and the NEWS file). There is just a new 'closed' argument to polyclip(). So you can treat 'A' as either closed or open.
It would be more flexible to allow 'A' to be a combination of closed and open shapes (which I believe Clipper can handle), but that would require much larger and more invasive changes.
Keen to hear what you think
Paul