Hi, sorry if this is the wrong place to post this, but there are some things that I think nalgebra could do better in terms of documentation.
Take for example the documentation for a
Ray. This is created using an ncollide3
Point, which is a nalgebra
Point3, which is a nalgebra
Point. Someone experienced with nalgebra who is seeking to construct a
Point might notice the
new methods on the side, which may be used to construct the
Point, but someone inexperienced with the library might notice that a
Point itself has a public field
coords which is a
VectorN<N, D> which is a
MatrixMN<N, D, U1>, etc, etc, and go on a long search to construct something that should be fairly straightforward, a point in 3d space.
Part of the blame here lies in how Rust generates documentation, but part of it also lies in how nalgebra is organised. Is having a long chain of type definitions really better than just having a both
Point3 structs, with traits implemented for both?
I really want to like and use nalgebra frequently, but I also don’t enjoy how long it takes to find what I’m looking for in the documentation.