From: Kirk, B. (JSC-EG311) <ben...@na...> - 2012-02-01 20:38:08
|
>> Yep, this is what I was thinking as well. Probably close_to_point() >> is the more general, so contains_point() would call it... > > I like this, except I'd leave tol=default_tolerance in contains_point. Agreed. literary license in the syntax - I apologize. What I meant by "really, I'm serious" is that the method is intended to see if a point is contained in an element, albeit to some tolerance, but should not be called to determine if a point is just close. And thanks for " homeomorphic to a ball" - it reminded me why I'm too juvenile for functional analysis. -Ben |