Weiler atherton clipping method

[jnemanja]

In draft because testing should have more cases and documentation probably needs some improvements. An extra commit is added with informal testing used during development, which is to be discarded before merge.

[juliohm]

That is an amazing contribution @jnemanja, thanks for putting the time into it. We will need to adjust the code over the week to match the style of the project, and to make sure that the behavior is correct.

Can you please address this first round of review below? Thank you!

[juliohm]

Another round of review related to code style before we can start reviewing the algorithm itself.

[juliohm]

@jnemanja can you please rebase this PR to the latest master branch, and rename WeilerAtherton to WeilerAthertonClipping to be more explicit?

As we are preparing for a v1.0, we will be more careful with naming methods. We already renamed SutherlandHodgman to SutherlandHodgmanClipping for clariry.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 91.40271% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 87.85%. Comparing base (243d3f0) to head (2a2f4cb).
Report is 13 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/clipping/weileratherton.jl	91.40%	19 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #999      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   87.69%   87.85%   +0.16%     
==========================================
  Files         191      192       +1     
  Lines        6005     6226     +221     
==========================================
+ Hits         5266     5470     +204     
- Misses        739      756      +17     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

[jnemanja]

Added tests to reach full coverage. Also, in the process I noticed that the order of rings in the polygons with holes is not always proper, so added a fix for that.

[jnemanja]

And rebased to latest again.

[juliohm]

@jnemanja thank you for the great work here, and for fixing the orientation of polygons in other unrelated tests.

In this second round of review I took a closer look into the implementation. I think we can simplify it a bit more, and reuse functionality in the auxiliary functions.

[jnemanja]

And rebased to the newest version.

[juliohm]

@jnemanja did you have a chance to take a look into this PR?

[jnemanja]

@jnemanja did you have a chance to take a look into this PR?

I am not aware of any additional issues I should address. If I missed something, could you point it out.

[juliohm]

I believe that tests will fail with the latest commits, but I did trigger the bot again to be sure.

[jnemanja]

I believe that tests will fail with the latest commits, but I did trigger the bot again to be sure.

The tests were successful, but the docs failed. Fixed that now and rebased to the newest release.

[juliohm]

@jnemanja could you please elaborate on this tolerance issue? Why can't we use the default atol in the following test?