You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Right now the "t + q -> t + t" conversion only converts it when there's two curves with the same delta. It doesn't account that t can be used in more cases, like where it reflects properly.
Describe the solution you'd like
Keep track of the quadratic control point somehow, for each q testing if the predicted control point matches with the actual control point, and replacing it with t if so.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Implement it myself? Not sure what to say
Additional context
For many circles, this would 66% the size (more realistically like 75% but still this is a big deal)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Right now the "t + q -> t + t" conversion only converts it when there's two curves with the same delta. It doesn't account that t can be used in more cases, like where it reflects properly.
Describe the solution you'd like
Keep track of the quadratic control point somehow, for each
q
testing if the predicted control point matches with the actual control point, and replacing it witht
if so.Describe alternatives you've considered
Implement it myself? Not sure what to say
Additional context
For many circles, this would 66% the size (more realistically like 75% but still this is a big deal)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: