ben/brouter
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 3

Fix typos in markdown files

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Waldir Pimenta 2024-01-15 19:31:07 +00:00
parent c72fc5f74d
commit b01aff2e4e
7 changed files with 41 additions and 43 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
docs/developers/algorithm.md
View file

@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ The reason that `c=0` (=Dijkstra) is used in the second pass and not `c=1`
(=A-Star) is simply that for `c=0` the open-set is smaller, because many paths
run into the cutoff at an early time and do not have to be managed in the
open-set anymore. And because the size of the open-set has an impact on
performance and memory consumption, c=0 is choosen for the second pass. The
performance and memory consumption, c=0 is chosen for the second pass. The
open-set is what's displayed in the graphical app-animation of the brouter-app.
However, you can change the coefficients of both passes in the routing-profile
@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ assign pass2coefficient=-1
```
Some more words on the conditions that the path-cost-funtion g(x) has to
fullfill. Mathematically it reads that you need *non-negative edge costs*, but
fulfill. Mathematically it reads that you need *non-negative edge costs*, but
the meaning is that at the time you reach a node you must be sure that no other
path reaching this node at a later time can lead to a better result over all.
@ -94,5 +94,5 @@ realized later, or maybe not.
Strictly speaking, neither Dijkstra nor A-Star can handle that. And in BRouter,
there's no real solution. There's a mechanism to delay the node-decision one
step further and so to reduce the probablity of glitches from that dirtyness,
step further and so to reduce the probability of glitches from that dirtiness,
but mainly the solution is *don't care*.