Subject: [ggl] Compilation warning level
From: Barend Gehrels (barend.gehrels)
Date: 2009-05-11 17:23:34
> I second this idea. Very good.
> I've started to think of doing quick rewrite of Shapelib to a
> single-header file with a shapefile class providing iterator-based
> interface, so it's just easy to read test files.
> I eventually deferred this idea to limit distractions for now :-)
Yep, for another reason as well: I have a shape-file implementation
(since 1995) which can eventually be converted. It's part of our
original library. It's still being used, all those years, so
close-to-perfect for all shapefiles (there are sometimes some deviations
in it, especially in the order of multi-polygons and holes).
So if ever necessary I (or someone else) can revise that one. Actually
it already works with our geometries. But the style is not yet OK and
there are many dependencies on other classes and files.
>> For GD (used in some samples but less than shapelib) don't know an
>> obvious and simple-to-use alternative.
> libgd is good I think, it's just a few files we could keep in our repo.
> BTW, if you are interested in using libgd under Windows (as a simple
> replacement to GDI), a wile ago I added utility function
> gdImageTrueColorAttachBuffer to libgd for that purpose, here is example:
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net