Re: About Dr. Geo Developement

Hello Andrea,=20

Thanks for your feedbacks. You feature wish list, make me think about a
1.0.0 release of DrGeo before we move to implementing new stuff which
could move DrGeo in unstable state.

Having a TODO list is indeed good, and the DrGeo one is truly non sense
and it should be clean up, just look at http://www.ofset.org/drgeo/todo.htm=
l.=20

However the TODO file in the source distribution is in a better shape.

Therefore I would like to take the opportunity of your message to work
on that TODO list first and see how the stuff could be implemented (for
example your point 1. I see three differents way of doing that, some
ugly, some other much better but harder)

Of course writing a TODO list will not make the stuff to appear like
magic, it will depends on a how much help we can have in that. So the
TODO list should be shapped in priority order.

I suggest we take on the TODO list I published several week ago at
http://www.ofset.org/wiki/index.php/DrGeoTodo

I will clean up this TODO list, then I will let you add stuff into it.

Let's start!

Hilaire


On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:59:08 +0000
Andrea Centomo <[email protected]> wrote:

  > Hello all
  >=20
  >              I'd like to expose some reflections to help the future=20
  > developement of Dr. Geo. These reflections arose also from=20
  > the use of the cvs version of Kig. As a general consideration
  > I think that Kig is more suitable than Dr. Geo for the study of
  > cartesian geometry, especially conics and cubics.
  > At the same time I think that for geometry without coordinates
  > and for programming Dr. Geo is the best.
  >=20
  > 1. like in Kig it could be useful to have in Dr. Geo the possibility
  >     of checking if three points are collinear, if two lines are perpend=
icular
  >     or parallel, if a point belongs to an object. More generally=20
  >     it could be good to improve a "proof apparatus";
  >=20
  > 2. moreover, as just pointed out, it could be useful to have
  >     a fill up function to fill with colour a geometrical region=20
  >     of a figure;
  >=20
  > 3. also leaving to Kig analitic geometry it could be useful=20
  >     to improve the structure of the coordinate grid adding=20
  >     numbers and orientation;
  >=20
  > 4. I have no precise ideas but it could be good to think
  >     of stuffs for 3D geometry: is it a nonsense?
  >=20
  > 5. it could be good to have the possibility of printing directly a figu=
re.
  >=20
  > Amiti=E9s
  > Andrea
  >=20
  >=20
  > ----------------------------------------------------------
  >=20
  > Andrea Centomo
  > email: [email protected]
  >=20
  >=20


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click