Hi Asa,
Thanks for the detailed investigation, I'll evaluate the result of the
changes and try to incorporate them in GDAL.
Best regards,
Tamas
2015-06-10 20:07 GMT+02:00 Asa Packer :
> Hello again,
>
> Sorry, I posted this using the Nabble gateway, and the text I formatted as
> raw text did
Hello again,
Sorry, I posted this using the Nabble gateway, and the text I formatted as
raw text did not come through correctly in email. Here is another try.
-Asa
---
Hello,
I am new to GDAL, and SWIG. I spent yesterday getting GDAL 1.11.2 compiled
and ran into similar errors trying to build
so nice.
Asa
--
View this message in context:
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/gdal-dev-CSharp-bindings-question-tp5207528p5210216.html
Sent from the GDAL - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org
Le lundi 01 juin 2015 07:47:55, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> On 29.05.2015 11:52, Even Rouault wrote:
> > As it might be difficult in practice to coordinate with all
> > maintainers at the exact time were things are needed, perhaps we need
> > some wiki page to document which new methods have been added a
On 29.05.2015 11:52, Even Rouault wrote:
As it might be difficult in practice to coordinate with all
maintainers at the exact time were things are needed, perhaps we need
some wiki page to document which new methods have been added and which
languages are impacted, so that the maintainer can lo
On 29.05.2015 15:22, Tamas Szekeres wrote:
Hi Ari,
Which SWIG version have you been testing with?
Mostly with the one that's loaded by default into a new Ubuntu (travis)
/ Mint (I have version 17 which is based on Ubuntu Trusty), both are
2.0.11 I think.
Converting IntPtr to string doesn
Hi Ari,
Which SWIG version have you been testing with?
Converting IntPtr to string doesn't seem to be a good solution. We should
do something like what we do for ReadRaster which also use
AddrOfPinnedObject().
I'm trying to reproduce this.
Best regards,
Tamas
2015-05-29 9:11 GMT+02:00 Ari Jol
Hi Ari,
> In my fork I've now added mono-mcs into the travis test machine and
> "make test" to CSharp. The build & tests all work.
>
> https://travis-ci.org/OSGeo/gdal/builds/6445
>
> However, one fix I did for the CSharp bindings is most probably wrong
> (convert return value of handle.Addr
In my fork I've now added mono-mcs into the travis test machine and
"make test" to CSharp. The build & tests all work.
https://travis-ci.org/OSGeo/gdal/builds/6445
However, one fix I did for the CSharp bindings is most probably wrong
(convert return value of handle.AddrOfPinnedObject() to
On 26.05.2015 13:53, Tamas Szekeres wrote:
Is that a requirement that the bindings should work well with all SWIG
versions or that the generated wrappers should work just fine?
I don't know about formal policy, There's nothing in
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc8_devguide nor
http://trac.o
Is that a requirement that the bindings should work well with all SWIG
versions or that the generated wrappers should work just fine?
Formerly I have been thinking that we should support all versions, but it
took large amount of extra efforts to work around all incompatible changes
what SWIG intro
26.05.2015, 11:38, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mardi 26 mai 2015 10:13:49, Tamas Szekeres a écrit :
Hi Ari,
I haven't tried to compile that with mono for quite a long time. I'll give
it a try.
However we did not follow the latest changes in the SWIG implementation
with the bindings, so I'd try
Le mardi 26 mai 2015 10:13:49, Tamas Szekeres a écrit :
> Hi Ari,
>
> I haven't tried to compile that with mono for quite a long time. I'll give
> it a try.
>
> However we did not follow the latest changes in the SWIG implementation
> with the bindings, so I'd try with an earlier version (ie. 1.3
Hi Ari,
I haven't tried to compile that with mono for quite a long time. I'll give
it a try.
However we did not follow the latest changes in the SWIG implementation
with the bindings, so I'd try with an earlier version (ie. 1.3.39) to
generate the wrappers. May be we should consider including the
Tamas,
I'm working on a cleanup of the bindings, trying to reduce the number of
language specifics in the common interface files.
I can test Python, Java, and Perl bindings well in my Linux machine but
can so far only generate and compile the CSharp wrappers. However, it
seems maybe possible
15 matches
Mail list logo
