下面是golang版本的@nirg答案(灵感来自于@@m-katz的c#代码)

func isPointInPolygon(polygon []point, testp point) bool {
    minX := polygon[0].X
    maxX := polygon[0].X
    minY := polygon[0].Y
    maxY := polygon[0].Y

    for _, p := range polygon {
        minX = min(p.X, minX)
        maxX = max(p.X, maxX)
        minY = min(p.Y, minY)
        maxY = max(p.Y, maxY)
    }

    if testp.X < minX || testp.X > maxX || testp.Y < minY || testp.Y > maxY {
        return false
    }

    inside := false
    j := len(polygon) - 1
    for i := 0; i < len(polygon); i++ {
        if (polygon[i].Y > testp.Y) != (polygon[j].Y > testp.Y) && testp.X < (polygon[j].X-polygon[i].X)*(testp.Y-polygon[i].Y)/(polygon[j].Y-polygon[i].Y)+polygon[i].X {
            inside = !inside
        }
        j = i
    }

    return inside
}

以下是M. Katz基于Nirg方法的答案的JavaScript变体:

function pointIsInPoly(p, polygon) {
    var isInside = false;
    var minX = polygon[0].x, maxX = polygon[0].x;
    var minY = polygon[0].y, maxY = polygon[0].y;
    for (var n = 1; n < polygon.length; n++) {
        var q = polygon[n];
        minX = Math.min(q.x, minX);
        maxX = Math.max(q.x, maxX);
        minY = Math.min(q.y, minY);
        maxY = Math.max(q.y, maxY);
    }

    if (p.x < minX || p.x > maxX || p.y < minY || p.y > maxY) {
        return false;
    }

    var i = 0, j = polygon.length - 1;
    for (i, j; i < polygon.length; j = i++) {
        if ( (polygon[i].y > p.y) != (polygon[j].y > p.y) &&
                p.x < (polygon[j].x - polygon[i].x) * (p.y - polygon[i].y) / (polygon[j].y - polygon[i].y) + polygon[i].x ) {
            isInside = !isInside;
        }
    }

    return isInside;
}

Like David Segonds' answer suggests I use an approach of angle summation derived from my concave polygon drawing algorithm. It relies of adding up the approximate angles of subtriangles around the point to obtain a weight. A weight around 1.0 means the point is inside the triangle, a weight around 0.0 means outside, a weight around -1.0 is what happens when inside the polygon but in reverse order (like with one of the halves of a bowtie-shaped tetragon) and a weight of NAN if exactly on an edge. The reason it's not slow is that angles don't need to be estimated accurately at all. Holes can be handled by treating them as separate polygons and subtracting the weights.

typedef struct { double x, y; } xy_t;

xy_t sub_xy(xy_t a, xy_t b)
{
    a.x -= b.x;
    a.y -= b.y;
    return a;
}

double calc_sharp_subtriangle_pixel_weight(xy_t p0, xy_t p1)
{
    xy_t rot, r0, r1;
    double weight;

    // Rotate points (unnormalised)
    rot = sub_xy(p1, p0);
    r0.x = rot.x*p0.y - rot.y*p0.x;
    r0.y = rot.x*p0.x + rot.y*p0.y;
    r1.y = rot.x*p1.x + rot.y*p1.y;

    // Calc weight
    weight = subtriangle_angle_approx(r1.y, r0.x) - subtriangle_angle_approx(r0.y, r0.x);

    return weight;
}

double calc_sharp_polygon_pixel_weight(xy_t p, xy_t *corner, int corner_count)
{
    int i;
    xy_t p0, p1;
    double weight = 0.;

    p0 = sub_xy(corner[corner_count-1], p);
    for (i=0; i < corner_count; i++)
    {
        // Transform corner coordinates
        p1 = sub_xy(corner[i], p);

        // Calculate weight for each subtriangle
        weight += calc_sharp_subtriangle_pixel_weight(p0, p1);
        p0 = p1;
    }

    return weight;
}

因此，对于多边形的每一段，都形成一个子三角形，并计算点，然后旋转每个子三角形以计算其近似角度并添加到权重。

调用subtriangle_angle_approx(y, x)可以替换为atan2(y, x) / (2.*pi)，但是一个非常粗略的近似值就足够精确了:

double subtriangle_angle_approx(double y, double x)
{
    double angle, d;
    int obtuse;

    if (x == 0.)
        return NAN;

    obtuse = fabs(y) > fabs(x);
    if (obtuse)
        swap_double(&y, &x);

    // Core of the approximation, a very loosely approximate atan(y/x) / (2.*pi) over ]-1 , 1[
    d = y / x;
    angle = 0.13185 * d;

    if (obtuse)
        angle = sign(d)*0.25 - angle;

    return angle;
}

答案取决于你用的是简单多边形还是复杂多边形。简单多边形不能有任何线段交点。所以它们可以有洞，但线不能交叉。复杂区域可以有直线交点，所以它们可以有重叠的区域，或者只有一点相交的区域。

对于简单多边形，最好的算法是光线投射(交叉数)算法。对于复杂多边形，该算法不检测重叠区域内的点。所以对于复杂多边形你必须使用圈数算法。

下面是一篇用C实现这两种算法的优秀文章。我试过了，效果不错。

http://geomalgorithms.com/a03-_inclusion.html

简单的解决方案是将多边形划分为三角形，并按这里解释的那样对三角形进行测试

如果你的多边形是凸多边形，可能有更好的方法。把这个多边形看作是无限条线的集合。每一行将空间一分为二。对于每一个点，很容易判断它是在直线的一边还是另一边。如果一个点在所有直线的同一侧，那么它在多边形内。

我认为这是迄今为止所有答案中最简洁的一个。

例如，假设我们有一个多边形，它带有多边形凹，看起来像这样:

大多边形顶点的二维坐标为

[[139, 483], [227, 792], [482, 849], [523, 670], [352, 330]]

方框顶点的坐标为

[[248, 518], [336, 510], [341, 614], [250, 620]]

空心三角形顶点的坐标为

[[416, 531], [505, 517], [495, 616]]

假设我们想要测试两个点[296,557]和[422,730]，如果它们在红色区域内(不包括边缘)。如果我们定位这两个点，它将是这样的:

显然，[296,557]不在读取区域内，而[422,730]在。

我的解决方案是基于圈数算法。下面是我只使用numpy的4行python代码:

def detect(points, *polygons):
    import numpy as np
    endpoint1 = np.r_[tuple(np.roll(p, 1, 0) for p in polygons)][:, None] - points
    endpoint2 = np.r_[polygons][:, None] - points
    p1, p2 = np.cross(endpoint1, endpoint2), np.einsum('...i,...i', endpoint1, endpoint2)
    return ~((p1.sum(0) < 0) ^ (abs(np.arctan2(p1, p2).sum(0)) > np.pi) | ((p1 == 0) & (p2 <= 0)).any(0))

要测试实现:

points = [[296, 557], [422, 730]]
polygon1 = [[139, 483], [227, 792], [482, 849], [523, 670], [352, 330]]
polygon2 = [[248, 518], [336, 510], [341, 614], [250, 620]]
polygon3 = [[416, 531], [505, 517], [495, 616]]

print(detect(points, polygon1, polygon2, polygon3))

输出:

[False  True]