On May 19, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Ben Webb wrote:
> 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 explicit > parentheses, so I put them in. It's entirely possible I put them in > the > wrong place though... It went from a && (b&&c || d) to a &&(b && (c || d)). I believe the former is correct:
If they are in the same cell and (either they are both done with the cell or they both point to the same point)