diff options
authorAkarsh Simha <>2016-09-28 07:39:27 (GMT)
committerAkarsh Simha <>2016-09-29 02:20:27 (GMT)
commitc1dc0b46e51424ffcc11b0cdf822852381442556 (patch)
parentd9158d4d986b29da2950a402612f01a919480fc6 (diff)
Update comments in SkyPoint::precess()
Rotation matrices are most efficient, even though access time is long See: Applying a rotation matrix, which costs 9 multiplications, is more efficient than applying a quaternion on a vector. The only issue is the overhead of accessing 9 double precision elements. It looks like it is best to stick to rotation matrices.
1 files changed, 5 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/kstars/skyobjects/skypoint.cpp b/kstars/skyobjects/skypoint.cpp
index 4f810f2..65f3d13 100644
--- a/kstars/skyobjects/skypoint.cpp
+++ b/kstars/skyobjects/skypoint.cpp
@@ -200,12 +200,12 @@ void SkyPoint::precess( const KSNumbers *num ) {
s[1] = sinRA0*cosDec0;
s[2] = sinDec0;
- // FIXME: 1. We should be using eigen / better algorithms for
- // matrix multiplication
- // According to callgrind, the call KSNumbers::p2( int, int ),
- // which is repeated 9 times per precess, has a similar cycle cost
- // as atan2(), so this could be important to fix!
+ // NOTE: Rotation matrices are the fastest way to do rotations on
+ // a vector. Quaternions need more multiplications. The rotation
+ // matrix compensates in some sense by having more 'precomputed'
+ // multiplications. The matrix elements seem to cache nicely, so
+ // there isn't much overhead in accessing them.
//Multiply P2 and s to get v, the vector representing the new coords.
// for ( unsigned int i=0; i<3; ++i ) {