Hello everyone, I had a quick look at the archives and other resources and could not find much information regarding the topic I discuss below (apart from an important remark in the documentation - ogr architecture).
I would be interested in using a family of specialised OGRGeometry classes, sporting a number of additional properties and functionality not at all relevant to OGR (read: application specific). This could be easily achieved with a dedicated geometry factory that utilises the appropriate constructor of the derived geometry class. However I see that 1) not only the current implementation of OGRGeometryFactory does not foresee this approach, 2) the drivers implementations use both the factory and explicitly the geometry constructors. Would this be a design change that could be considered? I do realise that it is a considerable amount of refactoring but apart from that I do not see immediate obstacles. Would I be missing some important issue? Regards, RLP _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
