Path Finder, but getting all available paths - path-finding

The question is this, when I use a simple Path A * I have the path between point A to point B, but what I need is for that path to go through all the available houses, for example:
Using Path A * it returns me like this:
What I need is this:
The rule is to go through all spaces without jumping square and not repeat, one more rule is not to walk diagonally.
I don't know if there is an algorithm for that and I don't even know how to start doing it, if someone can help me with that.
Thank you

Related

Trying to make a circle in Minecraft using coordinates and Sin & Cos

I am trying to write a Minecraft Datapack, which will plot a full armorstand circle around whatever runs the particular command. I am using a 3rd party mathematics datapack to use Sin and Cos. However, when running the command, the resulting plot was... not good. As you can see here: 1. Broken Circle., rather than have each vertex evenly placed in a circular line, I find a strange mess instead.
I would have thought loosing precision in Cos and Sin would simply make the circle more angular, I didn't expect it to spiral. What confuses me, is that +z (the red square) and -x (the purple one) are all alone. You can see on the blue ring (Which was made with a smaller radius) the gap between them persists.
My main issue is; How did my maths go from making a circle to a shredded mushroom, and is there a way to calculate the vertices with a greater precision?
Going into the project I knew I could simply spin the centre entity, and summon an armorstand x blocks in front using ^5 ^ ^, however I wanted to avoid this, due to my desire to be able to change the radius without needing to edit the datapack. To solve this, I used the Sin and Cos components to plot a new point, using a radius defined with scoreboards.
I first tested this using Scratch, in order to check my maths. You can see my code here: 2. Scratch code.
With an addition of the pen blocks, I was able to produce a perfect circle, which you can see here:
. Scratch visual proof.
With my proof of concept working, I looked online and found a Mathematical Functions datapack by yosho27, since the Cos and Sin functions are not built into the game. However, due to how Minecraft scoreboards are only Integers, Yosho27 multiplied the result of Cos and Sin by 100 to preserve 2 decimal places.
To start with, I am using a central armorstand with the tag center, which is at x: 8.5 z: 8.5. The scoreboards built into yosho's datapack that I am using is math_in for the values I want converted and math_out, which is where the final value is dumped.
Using signs, I keep track of the important values I am working with, as seen here: 4. Sign maths.
As I was writing this, I decided to actually compare both numbers to find this: 5. Image comparison, which shows me that somewhere in this calculation process, the maths has gone wrong. I modified the scratch side to match the minecraft conditions as much as possible, such as x100 and adding 850 to the result. From this result, I can see a disparity between x and z, even though they should be equal. Where Minecraft says 1: x= 864 z= 1487, Scratch says 1: x= 862.21668448: z= 1549.89338664. I assume this means the datapack's Cos and Sin are not accurate enough?
In light of this , I looked in yosho's datapack, I found this: 6. Yosho's code., which I just modified to be *= 10 instead of divide, in the hope of getting more precision. Modifying the rest of my code to match, I couldn't see any improvement in the numbers, although the armorstand vertices were a few pixels off the original circle, although I couldn't find a discernible pattern to this shift.
While this doesn't answer your full question, I'd like to point out two different ways you can solve the original issue at hand, no need to rely on some foreign math library:
^ ^ ^
Use Math, but let the game do it for you.
You can use the fact that the game is doing those rotational conversions for you already when using local coordinates. So, if you (or any entity) go to 0 0 0 and look / rotate in the angle that you want to calculate, then move forward by ^ ^ ^1, the position you're at now is basically <sin> 0 <cos>.
You can now take those numbers with your desired precision using data get and continue using them in whatever way you see fit.
Use recursive functions to move in incremenets
You point out in your question that
Going into the project I knew I could simply spin the centre entity, and summon an armorstand x blocks in front using ^5 ^ ^, however I wanted to avoid this, due to my desire to be able to change the radius without needing to edit the datapack. To solve this, I used the Sin and Cos components to plot a new point, using a radius defined with scoreboards.
So, to go back to that original idea, you could fairly easily (at least easier than trying to calculate the SIN/COS manually) find a solution that works for (almost) arbitrary radii and steps: By making the datapack configurable through e.g. scores, you can set it up to for example move forward by ^^^0.1 blocks for every point in a score, that way you can change that score to 50 to get a distance of ^^^5 and to 15 to get a distance of ^^^1.5.
Similarly you could set the "minimum" rotation between summons to be 0.1 degrees, then repeating said rotation for however many times you desire.
Both of these things can be achieved with recursive functions. Here is a quick example where you can control the rotational angle using the #rot steps score and the distance using the #dist steps score as described above (you might want to limit how often this runs with a score, too, like 360/rotation or whatever if you want to do one full circle). This example technically recurses twice, as I'm not using an entity to store the rotation. If there is an entity, you don't need to call the forward function from the rotate function but can call it from step (at the entity).
step.mcfunction
# copy scores over so we can use them
scoreboard players operation #rot_steps steps = #rot steps
scoreboard players operation #dist_steps steps = #dist steps
execute rotated ~ ~0.1 function foo:rotate
rotate.mcfunction
scoreboard players remove #rot_steps steps 1
execute if score #rot_steps matches ..0 positioned ^ ^ ^.1 run function foo:forward
execute if score #rot_steps matches 1.. rotated ~ ~0.1 run function foo:rotate
forward.mcfunction
scoreboard players remove #dist_steps steps 1
execute if score #dist_steps matches ..0 run summon armor_stand
execute if score #dist_steps matches 1.. positioned ^ ^ ^.1 run function foo:forward

Is there a formula to find affected square by sized-brush on a grid?

I am not sure how to put this problem in a single sentence, sorry if the title is misleading.
I am currently developing a simple terrain editor with a circle-shaped brush size. The image below shows a few cases that represent my problem.
additional info: the square size is fixed and uniform and in the current version, my concern is only to find which one is hit and which one is not (the amount of region covered is important for weighting the hit, but probably not right now)
My current solution (which is not even correct for a certain condition) is: given a hit in a position (x, y) with radius r, loop through all square from (x-radius, y-radius) to (x+radius, y+radius) and apply 2-D box to circle collision detection. But I don't think this is optimal (or even correct IMO).
Can anyone help me with this one? Thank you
Since i can't add a simple comment due to bureaucracy on this website i have to type it out here.
Anyway you're in luck since i was trying to do this recently as well! The way i did it is i iterated through the vertex array and check if the current vertex falls inside the radius of the circle. But perhaps what you want is to check it against each quad center and if that center falls inside the radius then add the whole quad as it's being collided.
Of course depending on the size of your grid the performance will vary so it's good to try to iterate through as few quads as needed. Though accessing these quads from the array is something you have to figure out yourself.

GKObstacleGraph How to Find Closest Valid point?

In a scenario where user wants to navigate via mouse or touch to some are of the map that is not passable. When sending the point to GKObstacleGRpah FindPath it just returns an empty array.
I want the unit to go to closest (or close enough) passable point.
What would be an appropriate way to find a closest valid point in GKObstacleGraph.
I understand that I can get the GKObstacle so I can enumerate it's vertices, and I know my unit's position...
But well... what is the next step ?
NOTE: I am not using GKAgengts.
Here was my thinking as I worked through this problem. There may be an easier answer, but I haven’t found it.
1. Figure out if a point is valid or not.
To do this, I actually have a CGPath representation of each obstacle. I export paths from PhysicsEditor and then load them in through a custom script that converts them to CGPath. I always store that CGPath along with the GKObstacle I created from the path. Finally, I can call CGPathContainsPoint to determine the the obstacle contains the point. If true, I know the point is invalid.
2. Once the point is invalid, find out which obstacle was clicked.
With my approach in #1, I already have a handle on the CGPath and obstacle it belongs to.
3. Find closest vertex
Now that I know the obstacle, find the vertex closest to the unit that is moving. I wouldn’t find the closet vertex to the point clicked because that could be around a corner. Instead, figure out the vector between the desired position and the unit. Then, draw an invisible line from the desired position through the vertex. I used this equation to find out where the lines would cross.
// http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1811549/perpendicular-on-a-line-from-a-given-point
let k = ((end.y - start.y) * (hitPoint.x - start.x) - (end.x - start.x) * (hitPoint.y - start.y)) / ((end.y - start.y) * (end.y - start.y) + (end.x - start.x) * (end.x - start.x))
let x4 = hitPoint.x - k * (end.y - start.y)
let y4 = hitPoint.y + k * (end.x - start.x)
let ret = float2(x: x4, y: y4)
4. Offset intersection by unit size towards moving unit
Knowing where the paths intersect along with the vector towards the unit, we can just move to intersection point + (the vector * unit size).
5. Edge cases
This gets tricky when you have two obstacles touching each other, or if you have very large obstacles. The user may think they are moving to the far side of the map, but this script will follow back to the closet valid point which could be nearby. Because of that, I scrapped all of the code and I just don’t allow you to move to invalid positions. A red X and a buzz sound happens prompting the user to select a new, valid position on the map.
6. DemoBots
I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall DemoBots from Apple having similar logic — they may be a good reference too.
7. Debug Layer
This took forever for me to get a proof of concept together. I’d highly recommend drawing lines on a debug layer to verify your logic.

How to implement KdTree using PCLPointCloud2 used in loadOBJfile in point cloud library?

Okay, so I have one OBJ file which I read into PCLpointcloud2. Now I want to feed it into a K-dTree. Which is not taking PCLPointCloud2 as input. I want to query any general point if it lies on the surface of my OBJ file.
I am finding it hard to understand their documentation. So how can it be done?
Plus, kindly point me to a good reference easily interpretable. And what is "PointT" BTW? Is it custom build type defined by us? please elaborate.
Look at the code in the provided tool pcl_mesh_sampling (in the PCL code directory under tools/mesh_sampling.cpp). It is relatively simple. It loads a model from PLY or OBJ then for each triangle it samples random points from the triangle. The final point cloud then undergoes a voxel-grid sample to make the points relatively uniform. Alternatively, you can just run the pcl_mesh_sampling program on your obj file to get an output PCD which you can then visualise with pcl_viewer before loading the PCD file into your own code.
Once you have the final point cloud, you can build and use a KD-Tree as per http://pointclouds.org/documentation/tutorials/kdtree_search.php
PointT is the template argument. The point cloud library can handle a variety of point types, from simple PointXYZ (having just x,y,z) to more complicated points like PointXYZRGBNormal (having x,y,z,normal_x,normal_y,normal_z, curvature, r, g, and b channels). Each algorithm is templated on the point type that you want to use. It would probably be easier if you used PointXYZ with your OBJ file, so use pcl::PointXYZ for all your template arguments. For more on templates see http://www.tutorialspoint.com/cplusplus/cpp_templates.htm and http://pointclouds.org/documentation/tutorials/adding_custom_ptype.php.
Update (reply to latest comment)
Added here because this reply is too long for a comment.
I think I see what you are getting at. So when you sample points from the point cloud & build a KD-tree of the object surface, and for each point you keep track which faces are nearby that point (probably all the faces adjacent to the face from which the point was sampled should be sufficient? Just one face is definitely insufficient). Then when the query point is given, you find the nearest point in the KD-tree and check whether the query point is on the "outside" or inside of the full list of nearby faces associated with that point in the KD-tree. If it's on the "inside" of all of them perhaps it is an interior point. But I cannot guarantee that this is true. That is my thinking on that question at the moment. But I do wonder if you want a mesh-based approach really. By the way, if you break your mesh up into convex parts then you can have nice guarantees when processing each convex part.

Improving shortest route algorithm

I have working A* algorithm, but I want to improve it. It finds the shortest path and everything appears as it should. The problem is that I want for route to keep distance (1 empty node or more) from non-walkable grid cells.
Any ideas how to solve this problem?
How it looks now:
What I want to do:
Solution 1:
Make your dot think it is bigger than it actually is (3x3 instead of 1x1) then work out path based on edges of the 3x3 square. (May require collision detection code, also a bypass to allow it through 1 block size gaps.)
Solution 2:
Calculate path as normal with an additional check so move your block 1 space away from the wall if there is space to do so.

Resources