From: me22 (me22.ca_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-11 15:26:27
On 6/11/06, Andy Little <andy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> OK. So going back to the original point. The intent in PQS is to use a
> quaternion solely for representing a rotation in 3D space. Putting quaternion in
> a 3D namespace makes sense to me from that viewpoint and should help to clarify
> its intended purpose.
>
In that case I think it should be called unit_quaternion to emphasise
the point. It would also make it clear that the implementation is
ensuring and assuming that w*w+x*x+y*y+z*z is very close to 1.
Regards,
Scott McMurray