GSoC Octave Proposal

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

GSoC Octave Proposal

Alex Provan
Hello,

I have written a draft of my GSoC as well as the public and private applications. I am aiming to do the "Implement Boolean Operations on Polygons" project. Could I have some suggestions to improve it?

link to proposal (I have submitted on GSoC website as well if that's easier)
link to public application:
http://wiki.octave.org/User:Provana

thanks

-Alex P
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GSoC Octave Proposal

John Swensen-3

On Mar 24, 2016, at 9:20 AM, Alex Provan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

I have written a draft of my GSoC as well as the public and private applications. I am aiming to do the "Implement Boolean Operations on Polygons" project. Could I have some suggestions to improve it?

link to proposal (I have submitted on GSoC website as well if that's easier)
link to public application:
http://wiki.octave.org/User:Provana

thanks

-Alex P

Lots of formatting to make it easier to read. I realize the GSoC gives a bulleted list of what needs to be in there, but just inserting information into this list makes it very difficult to read.

Just a nitpick about your background research of GPC, but GPC may be a little bit slower than Clipper and Boost (though much of that can be sped up with point sorting), but based on my past experience it is by far the most robust and commercially used polygon library on the planet. In fact, GPC has worked in many scenarios I have encountered with self-intersections and complex polygons that all the other solutions mess up very badly. All that being said, GPC is not an option anyways because of its non-OpenSource-compatible licensing. 

Let me know once you have your proposal in a more narrative format telling me the story of what you are going to do, why it is important, and why you are the right person to tackle it and I will take another look.

John S.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GSoC Octave Proposal

Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso-2
On Thu, 2016-03-24 at 10:36 -0700, John Swensen wrote:
> Lots of formatting to make it easier to read. I realize the GSoC
> gives a bulleted list of what needs to be in there, but just
> inserting information into this list makes it very difficult to
> read.

The formatting is actually wiki markup. I guess Alex couldn't figure
out access to the wiki and instead found a Google doc more convenient.

As to the actual bullet points, well, we (I) defined them a while ago,
after we (I) copied the application template from another GSoC
organisation. I forget which one. If the application template doesn't
seem helpful, maybe we can change it next year, if there is a next
year.

- Jordi G. H.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GSoC Octave Proposal

Carlo de Falco-2

On 25 Mar 2016, at 00:41, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The formatting is actually wiki markup. I guess Alex couldn't figure
> out access to the wiki and instead found a Google doc more convenient.

Actually I think this is the approach recomended by google for creating draft proposals this year.
On the new web interface that replaced melange students can link a Google doc to their draft and
transform it into a pdf when the proposal is to become final.

c.