# WASTE - Warfare by Artificial Strategic and Tactical Engines

WASTE - Warfare by Artificial Strategic and Tactical Engines

## Bresenham's Line Algorithm

by Sunir Shah

Last changed July 19, 1996.

## 1. Introduction

One of the most fundamental algorithms in the entire Universe of Algorithm Kind is the digital difference analyzer (DDA), which is pretty much what Bresenham's line algorithm is all about. In fact, this algorithm is considered a graphics primitive, which is why I know it. However, it also has many other non-graphical uses such as tracing a line across the WASTE map, or tracing the line of sight or any other 'line' problems.

## 2. Background

Before we begin, let's analyze the problem a bit. We have an 2D grid of some sort, like a map; however, the ordered pairs that reference a point on this grid can only be made up of integers because this is a computer and you can't have 0.3 of a byte. Unfortunately, in the real world, a line doesn't just stick to integral ordered pairs (see diagram 007-1).

[Image]

Actually, we're not even interested in the intersection of the grid lines. The grid, because it's on a computer, is actually an array arranged like so:

` 0 1 2 3 4 5 `

+-+-+-+-+-+-+

0| | | | | | |x

+-+-+-+-+-+-+

1| | | | | | |

+-+-+-+-+-+-+

2| | | | | | |

+-+-+-+-+-+-+

3| | | | | | |

+-+-+-+-+-+-+

y

Where (0,0) is the first element, (1,0) is the next, going up to (5,3).

Astute readers will notice that the Cartesian coordinates have been reversed vertically. This is really only conceptual. If you wanted, you can arrange the program so that positive is up and negative is down (the proper way). However, I've chosen to represent the y axis as above simply because that's how most graphic displays I've come into contact with deal with it that way and at some point I want to represent the data in WASTE on a graphical display.

To see what a line of slope 1/2 looks like on this array, see diagram 007-2. To create the line, I simply moved one down for every two across. The line looks pretty good, although a bit blocky (technically, the term is "aliased"). However, if we try a really odd fractional slope, such as 0.397, we'd have a really strange looking series of boxes. In fact, it'd be pretty hard to draw using a "one down for every two across" methodology. Fortunately, Bresenham's line algorithm steps in to save the day.

[Image]

## 3. The Math

Every line has a slope. For those unaware, a slope is defined simply as Rise/Run = DeltaY/DeltaX = (y2-y1)/(x2-x1). A slope is sometimes refered to as the variable m. This information is highly important for what's coming next.

Consider drawing a horizontal line (m = 0). All you have to do is loop through from point A to point B adding one from the X coordinate without altering the Y coordinate.

`LOOP WHILE not at point B ********* x <-- x + 1 END LOOP`

Similarly, for a vertical line (m = undefined as DeltaX = 0) loop through adding one from the Y coordinate without altering the X coordinate.

`LOOP WHILE not at point B * y <-- y + 1 * END LOOP *`

Although a bit harder, for a diagonal line with a slope of 1, you combine the two loops above, incrementing each coordinate every iteration.

`LOOP WHILE not at point B * x <-- x + 1 * y <-- y + 1 * END LOOP *`

Consider that every line can be made up by incrementing or decrement one coordinate every iteration and incrementing or decrementing the other coordinate periodically. For example, the line in part 2 had a slope of 1/2. Every iteration, the X coordinate was incremented whereas every SECOND loop the Y coordinate was incremented.

More complex slopes, such as 3/4, require a bit more thought. The slope ratio itself gives us some information. For every 4 boxes to the right, the line should go up 3. However, we have to distribute the 3 up movements out over the 4 right movements. So, quick division tells us that for every 1 1/3 times we go right we have to go up.

What?! How can you have a third of a loop? You can't. The decimal is called the error. The solution is to accumulate the error as we go along in a variable. When the error is greater than or equal to one, it accounts for one iteration out of the 4 that go right (plus the decimal). In this sense it is exactly like the diagonal above, but for one coordinate, an iteration is 'sucked up' every so often.

One thing to keep in mind is that a slope can be negative. This indicates the direction of the line. In our coordinate system (reversed Y), a line slanting left has a positive slope and a line slanting right as a negative slope, exactly the reverse with real Cartesian coordinates. Also keep in mind that both DeltaX AND DeltaY can be negative, resulting in a positive slope (the negatives divide out); however, the negativeness of the delta values is important when it comes to direction. We won't be adding one in every loop. Sometimes we'll need to subtract one.

## 4. The Algorithm

Given `A(x1,y1)`

and `B(x2,y2)`

and that the line is from A to B

`X <-- x1 `

Y <-- y1

DeltaX <-- x2 - x1

DeltaY <-- y2 - y1

IF DeltaX < 0

XChange <-- -1

DeltaX = -DeltaX

ELSE

XChange <-- 1

ENDIF

IF DeltaY < 0

YChange <-- -1

DeltaY = -DeltaY

ELSE

YChange <-- 1

ENDIF

ERROR <-- 0

i <-- 0

IF DeltaX < DeltaY

Length <-- DeltaY + 1

LOOP WHILE i < Length

Y <-- Y + YChange

Error <-- Error + DeltaX

IF Error > DeltaY

X <-- X + XChange

Error <-- Error - DeltaY

ENDIF

i <-- i + 1

ENDLOOP

ELSE

Length <-- DeltaX + 1

LOOP WHILE i < Length

X <-- X + XChange

Error <-- Error + DeltaY

IF Error > DeltaX

Y <-- Y + YChange

Error <-- Error - DeltaX

ENDIF

i <-- i + 1

ENDLOOP

ENDIF

## 5. The Explanation

Since I've already explained the math, the algorithm's explanation will be (relatively) easy.

First thing we need set the X and Y coordinates to the starting point (point A). Then, for calculating the slope and the direction, the delta X and delta Y coordinates are calculated.

The next step, which is done for both coordinates, deals with the direction of movement. For the X coordinate, movement to the left (negative delta X) is checked for and if true, the value added to the X coordinate during the loop is set to -1. If it's false, it's set to 1. Similarly, for the Y coordinate, up equates to -1 and down equates to 1.

Next, the error variable is set to 0 to begin accounting for the the accumulated error. The loop counter is also set to 0 here although it could just as easily be set to 0 inside the if-else construct.

Speaking of which, we then test to see which coordinate gets incremented more often. Actually a greater delta Y is checked for but it equates to the two cases. Both blocks are similar in nature, the first block being for lines with a slope greater than 1 and the second for blocks less than or equal to 1. Keep in mind that a line with a slope equal to one can just as easily be dealt with in either block because it's in between both sets of lines.

In the blocks, a loop iterates the number of times the greater-delta coordinate has to increment. In each iteration, the greater-delta coordinate either increments or decrements depending on its direction.

Then comes the crux of the algorithm: the accumulated error. Remember that the slope is the rise over the run. Because it's a ratio, it can be derived from any section of the line. Keeping that in mind, we can claim that for the one unit we moved in the direction of the constantly updated coordinate, we moved some fractional unit in the direction of the periodically updated coordinate. In fact, this fraction is the lesser-delta coordinate on the greater-delta coordinate. Once this fraction exceeds one, the periodically updated coordinate gets updated. To account for the bit over one (the decimal), just subtract one from the fraction or, in other words, the denominator from the numerator.

For instance, in the first block where the Y coordinate gets updated every iteration, we add delta X to the error term. Once the numerator is greater than or equal to the denominator (delta Y), add one to the X coordinate and then subtract delta Y (denominator) from the error term.

That's it. And you thought it was complicated!

## 6. Optimizations

What?! This tried and tested algorithm has room for improvement? I don't think so.

Well, the only improvement that I can see is instead of incrementing the X and Y coordinates each time and then using them to index into the array (although I left that out above), precalculate the linear offset into the array (y*width+x) and then add +/- array width for the Y coordinate and +/- 1 for the X coordinate to the offset. This way, instead of doing a multiplication and an add each loop, we only have to do those once.

Get the plain-text version here, Diagram 007-1 here and Diagram 007-2 here.

[Image]

This document has been released into the public domain.