Michael Kirk

I don't know that there's actually any good way of showing a deprecation warning when building with a deprecated feature flag. Anyone know any tricks? https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/7130 https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3486

You brute! But that might work... 😄

The motivation for my question (which I should have included originally, sorry!) is that I'm comparing the outputs of some geometry transformations to known "correct" answers. Occasionally the expected answer...

For my own reference, in geos, it looks like we're talking about this code: ``` class EqualsTopoPredicate : public IMPredicate { std::string name() const override { return std::string("equals"); } bool...

Thank you for making this change. I wrote a test harness to consume your xml tests here: https://github.com/georust/geo/tree/main/jts-test-runner It was especially useful when I was porting the topology graph stuff...

The new tests uncovered a couple errors in our own implementation, so thank you for those. All our tests are passing now. https://github.com/georust/geo/pull/1227/files

Thanks for the interest. These implementations should probably be based on a trait definition and live in geo.

> I think log and geo_types are both blockers because they are not 1.0 yet. Can you articulate why depending on a non-1.0 dependency blocks us from releasing a 1.0?...

A bigger thing that I might be worried about before 1.0 is making the data types opaque. Currently they are all just aliases for Vec. So that we can do...

> I think log and geo_types are both blockers because they are not 1.0 yet. > >> Can you articulate why depending on a non-1.0 dependency blocks us from releasing...