On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2011/7/4 Markus Metz :
>> BTW, I have reduced file I/O for d.vect type=area in GRASS 7, now
>> waiting for d.mon to come back...
>
> just note: currently working on d.mon...
wonderful!
Markus M
___
Hi,
2011/7/4 Markus Metz :
> BTW, I have reduced file I/O for d.vect type=area in GRASS 7, now
> waiting for d.mon to come back...
just note: currently working on d.mon...
Martin
--
Martin Landa * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa
___
grass-dev mailing
Hamish wrote:
> Markus Metz wrote:
>> IOW, the bounding boxes are not
>> gone, they are still there, but no longer stored in two
>> different locations, only in one location.
> ...
>> No, the new, reduced format performs better with larger
>> datasets. For small datasets, there should be not much o
Remind me - what was the reason to not move common code to (local)
library and prefer some arcane preprocessor/MAKE voodoo?
Not following so closely,
Maris.
2011/7/4 Hamish :
> [OT]
> re. r.in.lidar, I worry about that much cloned code.
> It is a shame that the #ifdef + Makefile solution to build
Markus Metz wrote:
> IOW, the bounding boxes are not
> gone, they are still there, but no longer stored in two
> different locations, only in one location.
...
> No, the new, reduced format performs better with larger
> datasets. For small datasets, there should be not much of a
> difference in ter
Hamish wrote:
> Markus Metz wrote:
>> the GRASS 7 vector topology format changed a bit. I have
>> removed redundant information (bounding boxes) from vector
>> topology
>
> Hi,
>
> just wondering how redundant that is.. for point data completely,
> but for a polygon of 500,000 vertices (forest boun
Markus Metz wrote:
> the GRASS 7 vector topology format changed a bit. I have
> removed redundant information (bounding boxes) from vector
> topology
Hi,
just wondering how redundant that is.. for point data completely,
but for a polygon of 500,000 vertices (forest boundary or the
coastline of Fl
