Barend Gehrels

That is more than enough! After break is fine of course. For the first set, let me know if it works / if you agree with merging the PR (#887)

Sure, all right and I’ll be patient! Thanks for all your efforts!

> I have the following additional test-case which was valid before and generates invalid polygon with #887: > https://wandbox.org/permlink/gr8EFMV1OZbu3eZK > > I did some more testing, and changed the test-case....

My reasoning is that the nearly trivial case (which Adam extracted) might be quite common and should be supported. But revising traversal/switch might take me several weeks again (I work...

Thanks @mcquay239 ! The compilation fixes can certainly be applied and will help some regressions in the regression matrix. The other fix can most probably be applied too - (have...

OK - thanks again. If necessary we can also split this PR

I don't remember the context, and I can't see from your nickname who you are, so I can't look up our conversation. In general spikes are handled, already for several...

Hi @vissarion , these geometries are calculated by my concept buffer-around-point-in-geo implementation. Using the direct formula as used in the other ticket. So basically I think the initialization is perfect,...

Hi @vissarion thanks. I now tried with `long double` and it is better - but also not perfect yet... Below my new output. As you can see the area is...

And indeed, if I use a buffer distance of 100 meter instead of 1 meter, then coordinates are further apart, and I get a neat output, and also much better...