Hi Frank,
I've updated the RFC.
Sam.
On 16 May 2013 10:26, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Sam Gillingham
> wrote:
>
>> Etienne, Frank,
>>
>> The original idea was to save space with the byte type, although I admit
>> bools are a rather unusual case. If we repr
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Sam Gillingham wrote:
> Etienne, Frank,
>
> The original idea was to save space with the byte type, although I admit
> bools are a rather unusual case. If we represent them as ints it might be
> more straightforward just to use the int form of ValuesIO instead. How
Etienne, Frank,
The original idea was to save space with the byte type, although I admit
bools are a rather unusual case. If we represent them as ints it might be
more straightforward just to use the int form of ValuesIO instead. How
about removing the bool form of ValuesIO and should a future dri
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Sam,
>
> It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
> booleans as Byte instead of integer.
>
everywhere else booleans are defined as integers like this
int bSomeVar;
>
> Best regards,
> Frank
>
>
>
> On Mon, May
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sam Gillingham wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - "Improving performance of Raster
> Attribute Table implemen
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sam Gillingham wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - "Improving performance of Raster
> Attribute Table implemen
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sam Gillingham wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - "Improving performance of Raster
> Attribute Table implemen
Hi All,
I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - "Improving performance of Raster
Attribute Table implementation for large tables" adopted. This adds some
new functionality for GDAL 2.0. Even and others have made suggestions and
these have been incorporated into the RFC:
http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki
