根据t3chb0t的答案:

int intersezione_linee(int x1, int y1, int x2, int y2, int x3, int y3, int x4, int y4, int& p_x, int& p_y)
{
   //L1: estremi (x1,y1)(x2,y2) L2: estremi (x3,y3)(x3,y3)
   int d;
   d = (x1-x2)*(y3-y4) - (y1-y2)*(x3-x4);
   if(!d)
       return 0;
   p_x = ((x1*y2-y1*x2)*(x3-x4) - (x1-x2)*(x3*y4-y3*x4))/d;
   p_y = ((x1*y2-y1*x2)*(y3-y4) - (y1-y2)*(x3*y4-y3*x4))/d;
   return 1;
}

int in_bounding_box(int x1, int y1, int x2, int y2, int p_x, int p_y)
{
    return p_x>=x1 && p_x<=x2 && p_y>=y1 && p_y<=y2;

}

int intersezione_segmenti(int x1, int y1, int x2, int y2, int x3, int y3, int x4, int y4, int& p_x, int& p_y)
{
    if (!intersezione_linee(x1,y1,x2,y2,x3,y3,x4,y4,p_x,p_y))
        return 0;

    return in_bounding_box(x1,y1,x2,y2,p_x,p_y) && in_bounding_box(x3,y3,x4,y4,p_x,p_y);
}

FWIW，下面的函数(在C中)既检测线的交点，又确定交点。这是基于Andre LeMothe的“Tricks of the Windows Game Programming Gurus”中的一个算法。这与其他答案(例如Gareth的答案)中的一些算法并没有什么不同。然后LeMothe使用克莱默法则(不要问我)来解这些方程。

我可以证明它在我的小行星克隆中起作用，并且似乎正确地处理了Elemental, Dan和Wodzu在其他答案中描述的边缘情况。它也可能比KingNestor发布的代码快，因为它都是乘法和除法，没有平方根!

我想这里有一些除以0的可能性，尽管在我的例子中这不是问题。很容易修改以避免崩溃。

// Returns 1 if the lines intersect, otherwise 0. In addition, if the lines 
// intersect the intersection point may be stored in the floats i_x and i_y.
char get_line_intersection(float p0_x, float p0_y, float p1_x, float p1_y, 
    float p2_x, float p2_y, float p3_x, float p3_y, float *i_x, float *i_y)
{
    float s1_x, s1_y, s2_x, s2_y;
    s1_x = p1_x - p0_x;     s1_y = p1_y - p0_y;
    s2_x = p3_x - p2_x;     s2_y = p3_y - p2_y;

    float s, t;
    s = (-s1_y * (p0_x - p2_x) + s1_x * (p0_y - p2_y)) / (-s2_x * s1_y + s1_x * s2_y);
    t = ( s2_x * (p0_y - p2_y) - s2_y * (p0_x - p2_x)) / (-s2_x * s1_y + s1_x * s2_y);

    if (s >= 0 && s <= 1 && t >= 0 && t <= 1)
    {
        // Collision detected
        if (i_x != NULL)
            *i_x = p0_x + (t * s1_x);
        if (i_y != NULL)
            *i_y = p0_y + (t * s1_y);
        return 1;
    }

    return 0; // No collision
}

顺便说一句，我必须说，在LeMothe的书中，虽然他显然得到了正确的算法，但他展示的具体示例插入了错误的数字，并且计算错误。例如:

(4 * (4-1) + 12 * (7-1))/(17 * 4 + 12 * 10) = 844/0.88 = 0.44

这让我困惑了好几个小时。：(

上面有很多解决方案，但我认为下面的解决方案很简单，很容易理解。

矢量AB和矢量CD相交当且仅当

端点a和b在线段CD的两边。 端点c和d在线段AB的对边。

更具体地说，a和b在线段CD的对面当且仅当两个三元组中有一个是逆时针顺序的。

Intersect(a, b, c, d)
 if CCW(a, c, d) == CCW(b, c, d)
    return false;
 else if CCW(a, b, c) == CCW(a, b, d)
    return false;
 else
    return true;

这里的CCW代表逆时针，根据点的方向返回真/假。

来源:http://compgeom.cs.uiuc.edu/~jeffe/teaching/373/notes/x06-sweepline.pdf 第二页

有一个很好的方法来解决这个问题就是用向量叉乘。定义二维向量叉乘v × w为vx wy−vy wx。

假设这两条线段从p到p + r，从q到q + s。那么第一行上的任意点都可以表示为p + t r(对于标量参数t)，第二行上的任意点可以表示为q + u s(对于标量参数u)。

如果t和u满足以下条件，两条直线相交:

P + t r = q + u s

两边叉乘s，得到

(p + r) × s = (q + u s) × s

由于s × s = 0，这意味着

T (r × s) = (q−p) × s

因此，求解t:

T = (q−p) × s / (r × s)

同样地，我们可以解出u:

(p + r) × r = (q + u s) × r U (s × r) = (p−q) × r U = (p−q) × r / (s × r)

为了减少计算步骤，可以方便地将其重写为以下形式(记住s × r =−r × s):

U = q−p × r / (r × s)

现在有四种情况:

If r × s = 0 and (q − p) × r = 0, then the two lines are collinear. In this case, express the endpoints of the second segment (q and q + s) in terms of the equation of the first line segment (p + t r): t0 = (q − p) · r / (r · r) t1 = (q + s − p) · r / (r · r) = t0 + s · r / (r · r) If the interval between t0 and t1 intersects the interval [0, 1] then the line segments are collinear and overlapping; otherwise they are collinear and disjoint. Note that if s and r point in opposite directions, then s · r < 0 and so the interval to be checked is [t1, t0] rather than [t0, t1]. If r × s = 0 and (q − p) × r ≠ 0, then the two lines are parallel and non-intersecting. If r × s ≠ 0 and 0 ≤ t ≤ 1 and 0 ≤ u ≤ 1, the two line segments meet at the point p + t r = q + u s. Otherwise, the two line segments are not parallel but do not intersect.

来源:该方法是3D线相交算法的2维专门化，来自Ronald Goldman发表在Graphics Gems，第304页的文章“三条线在三维空间中的相交”。在三维空间中，通常的情况是直线是倾斜的(既不平行也不相交)，在这种情况下，该方法给出了两条直线最接近的点。

我将Kris的答案移植到JavaScript。在尝试了许多不同的答案后，他给出了正确的观点。我以为我要疯了，因为我没有得到我需要的分数。

function getLineLineCollision(p0, p1, p2, p3) {
    var s1, s2;
    s1 = {x: p1.x - p0.x, y: p1.y - p0.y};
    s2 = {x: p3.x - p2.x, y: p3.y - p2.y};

    var s10_x = p1.x - p0.x;
    var s10_y = p1.y - p0.y;
    var s32_x = p3.x - p2.x;
    var s32_y = p3.y - p2.y;

    var denom = s10_x * s32_y - s32_x * s10_y;

    if(denom == 0) {
        return false;
    }

    var denom_positive = denom > 0;

    var s02_x = p0.x - p2.x;
    var s02_y = p0.y - p2.y;

    var s_numer = s10_x * s02_y - s10_y * s02_x;

    if((s_numer < 0) == denom_positive) {
        return false;
    }

    var t_numer = s32_x * s02_y - s32_y * s02_x;

    if((t_numer < 0) == denom_positive) {
        return false;
    }

    if((s_numer > denom) == denom_positive || (t_numer > denom) == denom_positive) {
        return false;
    }

    var t = t_numer / denom;

    var p = {x: p0.x + (t * s10_x), y: p0.y + (t * s10_y)};
    return p;
}

曾经在这里被接受的答案是不正确的(它已经被不接受了，所以万岁!)它不能正确地消除所有非交点。简单地说，它可能有效，但也可能失败，特别是在0和1被认为对h有效的情况下。

考虑以下情况:

直线(4,1)-(5,1)和(0,0)-(0,2)

这两条垂线显然不重叠。

= (4,1) B =(5、1) C = (0, 0) D = (0, 2) E = (1) - (4,1) = (1,0) F = (0, 2) - (0, 0) = (0, 2) P = (0, 1) h =((4,1) -(0, 0))点(0,1)/((0,2)点(0,1))= 0

根据上面的答案，这两条线段在端点处相遇(值为0和1)。该端点为:

(0, 0) + (0, 2) * 0 = (0, 0)

So, apparently the two line segments meet at (0,0), which is on line CD, but not on line AB. So what is going wrong? The answer is that the values of 0 and 1 are not valid and only sometimes HAPPEN to correctly predict endpoint intersection. When the extension of one line (but not the other) would meet the line segment, the algorithm predicts an intersection of line segments, but this is not correct. I imagine that by testing starting with AB vs CD and then also testing with CD vs AB, this problem would be eliminated. Only if both fall between 0 and 1 inclusively can they be said to intersect.

如果你必须预测端点，我建议使用向量叉乘法。

-Dan