Confirmation of expected behaviour of mathutils.geometry.intersect_point_line for higher dimensions

[avyavkumar]

From the documentation of mathutils.geometry.intersect_point_line the point closest to the given point on a line should be returned.

it looks like the method does not work for higher dimensions - the point returned has at most 3 dimensions. A quick check can reproduce this behaviour -

from mathutils.geometry import intersect_point_line
import numpy as np

pointA = np.arange(50)
pointB = np.arange(100, 150)
pointC = np.arange(200, 250)
pointD = np.arange(300, 350)
centroids = [pointA, pointB, pointC, pointD]
print(centroids)
for centroid in centroids:
  print(intersect_point_line(centroid, centroids[0], centroids[-1]))

[array([ 0,  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  8,  9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16,
       17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33,
       34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]), array([100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112,
       113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125,
       126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138,
       139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149]), array([200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212,
       213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225,
       226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238,
       239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249]), array([300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312,
       313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325,
       326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338,
       339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349])]
(Vector((0.0, 1.0, 2.0)), 0.0)
(Vector((100.0, 101.0, 102.0)), 0.3333333432674408)
(Vector((200.0, 201.0, 202.0)), 0.6666666865348816)
(Vector((300.0, 301.0, 302.0)), 1.0)

The points are 50 dimensional, however, only a 3D point is returned. I am assuming that this is incorrect behaviour and we would need to implement a separate function for higher dimensions. Please let me know if this is correct. Thanks!

[ilia10000]

Yeah, this seems like a mistake in Blender.
The expected behavior in their docs mentions nothing about restrictions on the dimensionality of the points as far as I can tell, but in the source code it seems to be hard-coded.
If I remember correctly, for the higher dimensional experiments we created a separate set of functions. Those would probably be the 'multiD' ones.