Dmitriy,
The main reason for the new symbol is that if we change the return type it
might cause crashing problems that are not detected at compile time if GetFID
is used in a printf like function. For example
printf("%ld %s", GetFID (), str)
Even
---
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com
<div>-------- Message d'origine --------</div><div>De : Dmitriy Baryshnikov
<bishop....@gmail.com> </div><div>Date :24/01/2015 14:07 (GMT+01:00)
</div><div>A : gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org </div><div>Objet : Re: [gdal-dev] Call
for discusson on RFC 31 - OGR 64bit Integer
Fields and FIDs </div><div>
</div>Hi Even,
The RFC looks good. One note. May be in GDAL 2 we can use GetFID instead
GetFID64? Because we can allow some incompatibility between GDAL 1.x and
GDAL 2.x.
Best regards,
Dmitry
23.01.2015 18:17, Even Rouault пишет:
> Hi,
>
> This is a call for discussion on revisiting the existing RFC 31 - OGR 64bit
> Integer Fields and FIDs, initiated by Frank in 2010 and that I've extended.
>
> http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc31_ogr_64
>
> Below the summary :
> """
> This RFC addresses steps to upgrade OGR to support 64bit integer fields and
> feature ids. Many feature data formats support wide integers, and the
> inability to transform these through OGR causes increasing numbers of
> problems.
> """
>
> A first discussion took place at http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-
> dev/2010-November/thread.html#26883. My main remarks at that time were about
> compatibility issues, but as this would go in GDAL 2.0, they are likely less
> critical.
>
> Even
>
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
