On May 19, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Ben Webb wrote:
It went from a && (b&&c || d) to a &&(b && (c || d)). I believe the former is correct:Daniel Russel wrote:- && o.cvoxel_ == o.evoxel_ - || curp_ == o.curp_); + && (o.cvoxel_ == o.evoxel_ + || curp_ == o.curp_));This changes the logic and I don't think it is correct.g++ 4.3 gets very uneasy about bunches of && and || without explicitparentheses, so I put them in. It's entirely possible I put them in thewrong place though...
If they are in the same cell and (either they are both done with the cell or they both point to the same point)