Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

7
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting, I tried your solution with "my" random points and it gets one crossing line. I think anyway that this looks nicer than mine. Something else is that labels are not sorted, but adding it wouldn't be much more work. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 22, 2012 at 1:17
  • $\begingroup$ @FJRA I admit I chose a good looking sample. I am sure there will be some crossings. Still I think this is different and potentially useful method. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 22, 2012 at 1:40
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, and solving in an elegant way the crossing lines should be next Szabolcs question :). $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 22, 2012 at 1:43
  • $\begingroup$ @FJRA could you give me "your" random points please? I'd like to see how my method performs with some adjustments. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 22, 2012 at 1:44
  • $\begingroup$ Sure! {{0.55982, 0.812151}, {0.035458, 0.472234}, {0.936164, 0.42964}, {0.194451, 0.0983938}, {0.582078, 0.55705}, {0.393611, 0.142285}, {0.039996, 0.254498}, {0.735887, 0.202454}, {0.893022, 0.762304}, {0.0935256, 0.767854}, {0.849199, 0.334092}, {0.202145, 0.536306}} $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 22, 2012 at 1:50