Computer Graphics from Scratch (2017)
Because I am a big jerk, I am going to take this opportunity to complain about a pet peeve, and ask for brainstorming help.<p>This (generally-pretty-great) book, like many educational materials about computer graphics, makes a terminological choice that I believe to be plainly a mistake.  It uses the word "rasterizer" to mean "renderer that works by applying transforms to polygons", as contrastive with a "raytracer" (more generally, a physically-based light transport model).  (e.g. "Raytracing and Rasterization, which focus on the two main ways to make pretty pictures out of data").<p>Properly (from a descriptivist standpoint), a "rasterizer" is any algorithm that transforms vector data into raster data, where rasters are arrays of horizontal lines, each horizontal line composed of pixels.  RAYTRACERS ARE RASTERIZERS.  (I mean, not if you're using the raytracer to detect collisions or for some other purpose; only if you're using it to generate 2d images of any kind.)<p>Surely there must be some better terminology for the non-physically-based option?  I tend to say "polygon-pusher", but this is my own neologism.  Does anyone have any suggestions for a more accurate name for this type of renderer?<p>Saying "rasterizer" in the sense the book does is as common as saying "literally" to mean "figuratively", as common as writing "there" to mean "they're".  So I know that probably there's no fixing it.  But I'm still hoping.