Subject: [ggl] Compilation warning level
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz)
Date: 2009-05-11 17:36:31
Barend Gehrels wrote:
>> 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.
Cool, it's interesting.
I'll take the subject up here when I'm back to it.
-- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Geometry list run by mateusz at loskot.net