I agree that using u-turns is good for pedestrian or bikers (and maybe cars) - if the u-turn is exactly on a via point. This is what #100 refers to.
Currently there is a problem that affects cars and bikers. Suppose following situation (without via point):
g
|
- a - b - c - d - e -
|
f
There is a restriction at b: Coming from a it is not allowed to turn left to g. In addition g and f are dead ends. If you route from a to g osrm is currently suggesting a route a - b - c - f - c - b - g. Is this intentional or a bug?
In real life this is a bad idea. It would be better to go on trying to find a loop, even if it looks like an penalty. So i vote for an u-turn penalty.
I agree that using u-turns is good for pedestrian or bikers (and maybe cars) - if the u-turn is exactly on a via point. This is what #100 refers to.
Currently there is a problem that affects cars and bikers. Suppose following situation (without via point):
g | - a - b - c - d - e - | fThere is a restriction at b: Coming from a it is not allowed to turn left to g. In addition g and f are dead ends. If you route from a to g osrm is currently suggesting a route a - b - c - f - c - b - g. Is this intentional or a bug?
In real life this is a bad idea. It would be better to go on trying to find a loop, even if it looks like an penalty. So i vote for an u-turn penalty.