Javier Jimenez Shaw via PROJ <proj@lists.osgeo.org> writes: > What I did is using int16. The max error is 1.2 mm (if I did the maths > correctly). The size with that change is about 24 MB > If anybody wants even more accuracy, they can use int32. The reduction is > smaller, but still less than 100 MB.
It's hard to believe that there is true accuracy to 1 mm; that seems state of the art for multi-year observations determining HAE at a national reference station. But it might be nice to numerically match NGS tools ~exactly as a check. Perhaps having makefile support to create the int32 version, and not putting it in tarballs. It could be hosted elsewhere; it feels like we are running up against github limitations that perhaps should not control how things are, but doing something different may be hard/expensive. > (any benefit between uint16 vs int16? the positive and negative ranges are > almost the same, so I do not need offset with int16) Using a signed type for a signed value seems like a win in terms of reduced cognitive load. _______________________________________________ PROJ mailing list PROJ@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
