On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 08:34:10PM +0200, Patrick Valsecchi wrote: > Hi Bart, > > On Wednesday 23 July 2008, you wrote: > > I am using the transform function of OpenLayers, which in its turn calls > > proj4js, should it change the transformed property for all the points in a > > geometry in your opinion? That does not seem effective does it? > > Like Christopher said, you shouldn't have any reason to transform your > coordinates twice.
Er, I did? I don't remember that. In fact, there are many reasons to need this. > On one hand, proj4j is sparing some memory (I'm the first one to encourage > that, especially with a garbage collector in the way) by replacing the values > in the passed object, but, on the other hand, it adds a field to this object > eating some more memory. If it's for avoid some bugs, then it's a good idea, > but it's done wrong. A lib should not ignore a API call because it thinks its > a bug. Then how can the programmer notice he has something wrong in his code? It doesn't 'ignore' it, it logs a message for the developer to read. > If we broaden the discussion, the javascript world has IMHO way too much > places where the errors are silent and the input are assumed to be correct > (defined, of the good type and consistent) and never checked. THis is not the case here. The input is checked, the developer is informed of the problem. This is not a proj4js library problem. > I think the debug version of the libs (OpenLayers, Ext, proj4j, ...) > should have extra code checking the consitency and reporting all > errors (throwing exceptions). For example, a constructor should check > that all the mandatory settings are set, of the good type and > consistent. That would help the developper to find errors as soon as > possible. Patches welcome. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@openlayers.org http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/users