> Ah, I *think* the problem is that you're parsing the words in the man
> page in a completely different way from me (and, I assume, the person
> who wrote the man page).  Given your new wording, it sounds to me like
> there has to be an adjacent plane in each direction in order to have a
> collision, which is clearly illogical.
> 
> So, perhaps your change cleared up your confusion, but only at the
> expense of confusing other people.  This is not really an improvement.

Hmmm...  Reading it again, I still don't see how you can parse
"adjacency in any of the three dimensions" to mean what the code
is implementing.  Certainly, the code implements:

	if (deltaAlt <= 1 && deltaX <= 1 && deltaY <= 1) collision;

To me, that's overlap or adjacency in all three dimensions.  Certainly,
this defines a subset of conditions meeting "any of the three dimensions".

-allen

-- 
                    Allen Briggs - briggs@ninthwonder.com