Fixing a minor problem with multiple via nodes.

This commit is contained in:
DennisOSRM 2012-03-23 11:06:33 +01:00
parent 87f4341866
commit 2549f7254a

View File

@ -256,8 +256,10 @@ public:
if( (packedPath1.back() == packedPath2.back()) && phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.isBidirected() ) { if( (packedPath1.back() == packedPath2.back()) && phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.isBidirected() ) {
// INFO("both paths end in same direction on bidirected edge, make sure start only start with : " << packedPath1.back()); // INFO("both paths end in same direction on bidirected edge, make sure start only start with : " << packedPath1.back());
searchFrom1stStartNode ^= (packedPath1.back() != phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode);
searchFrom2ndStartNode ^= (packedPath1.back() != phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode+1); NodeID lastNodeID = packedPath2.back();
searchFrom1stStartNode &= !(lastNodeID == phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode+1);
searchFrom2ndStartNode &= !(lastNodeID == phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode);
// INFO("Next search from node " << phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode << ": " << (searchFrom1stStartNode ? "yes" : "no") ); // INFO("Next search from node " << phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode << ": " << (searchFrom1stStartNode ? "yes" : "no") );
// INFO("Next search from node " << phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode+1 << ": " << (searchFrom2ndStartNode ? "yes" : "no") ); // INFO("Next search from node " << phantomNodePair.targetPhantom.edgeBasedNode+1 << ": " << (searchFrom2ndStartNode ? "yes" : "no") );
} }