gdal
gdal copied to clipboard
OSGeo
Start of Viewshed Rework for Style and Efficiency
This is a first step at changing the viewshed code to break up an overly long algorithm and increase efficiency.
coverage: 69.079% (-0.003%) from 69.082% when pulling 12ce38b3780a2bf38bf04a84be73b4d7dcd2415a on abellgithub:viewshed-update into 257ac57c69d0b8526899bb5a5b55ed26aff3c573 on OSGeo:master.
I don't understand the doxygen CI failure. I ran doxygen locally and searched for "warning" and found none.
I don't understand the doxygen CI failure. I ran doxygen locally and searched for "warning" and found none.
I believe this is due to the CI check running on Ubuntu 22.04 with Doxygen 1.9.1, which may not understand the [[maybe_unused]] annotation. I'm trying https://github.com/rouault/gdal/commit/85b7122ad2bad05e7db401ad52907bc2a6352544 to run the check on the Docker container based on Ubuntu 24.04 with Doxygen 1.9.8 which is the one used to build the doc. Build at https://github.com/rouault/gdal/actions/runs/8927118366 . If that works, I'll push it to your branch
I'll push it to your branch
ok, this worked. I've updated your branch with that fixup commit
@abellgithub Anything you want to add to this PR, or is it ready to merge once CI is happy?
Do you do an interactive rebase? What happens with the merge commits? Just curious.
Do you do an interactive rebase?
for some reason, git rebase -i with commit folding generated conflicts here. So I ended up doing the poor-man way: manually saving the modified files, hard reseting to origin/master and copying over the modified files...
ah I see that in the process, this lost your git authorship... Fixed with git commit --amend --author="Andrew Bell <[email protected]>"
I just do squash merges. Is the other way better?
no, perhaps I could have done it through squash merges to generate a single commit, but here I wanted to separate the argparse.hpp change. I'm not pretending to master git :-)
Let me know if there are things I can do that would make things easier for you.