Even Rouault comments

Results 1295 comments of


                                            Even Rouault

Add VSIGetMemFileBuffer to C# / .NET bindings

FYI there's nobody currently in the current core maintainter team with C# knowledge, so this is left as an opportunity for contribution to others

Add VSIGetMemFileBuffer to C# / .NET bindings

> Which branch should i target for PR master first. We can then decide to backport to the stable branch (that will be release/3.10 now) if appropriate

Python bindings: add a osgeo.gdal_fsspec module that on import will register GDAL VSI file system handlers as fsspec AbstractFileSystem

> can we do without so many new forms of identifiers? I also had the same hesitation, and I would be OK with just having a single "gdalvsi" fsspec protocol...

Python bindings: add a osgeo.gdal_fsspec module that on import will register GDAL VSI file system handlers as fsspec AbstractFileSystem

Pull request simplified to register a single "gdalvsi" fsspec protocol as suggested by @sgillies

Maintained fork in https://github.com/qgis/o2

@nyalldawson should we turn on issues on https://github.com/qgis/o2 ?

CoverageSimplify: add progress callback and add GEOSCoverageSimplifyVWWithProgress_r()

> I'm not sure about adding new C API signatures with a callback vs separately setting a progress callback I thought a bit about that, but that seems a bit...

CoverageSimplify: add progress callback and add GEOSCoverageSimplifyVWWithProgress_r()

> I'm fine removing the interrupt part of the callback if preferred. now done

CoverageSimplify: add progress callback and add GEOSCoverageSimplifyVWWithProgress_r()

Any extra changes needed ?

CoverageSimplify: add progress callback and add GEOSCoverageSimplifyVWWithProgress_r()

> does this provide a reasonable progress estimate for different datasets / parameters I've just improved that with a new commit that adds sub-progress for the 2 createEdges() calls done...

CoverageSimplify: add progress callback and add GEOSCoverageSimplifyVWWithProgress_r()

> but I'm not confident that it's practical to do so for other algorithms that would benefit from progress reporting. what are you thinking to specifically ? I'm really skeptical...