Hi Even, No comment on the actual change which sounds fine to me.
However, could we add a "Version: ..." field to the header of RFCs to make it easier to track down the version to which a RFC applies? I saw that you indicate the version in the status field after a RFC has been implemented, but while it's in draft and during the discussion phase there is no indication of the target version.
In this specific case, I presume it is a V2.0 change since it breaks API/ABI compatibility, right? Same comment for the Date/Time RFC that was discussed earlier this week.
Thanks Daniel On 2015-04-07 3:33 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
Hi, This is a call for discussion on "64-bit bucket counts for histograms" (last one for today ;-) and hopefully a no-brainer) https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc57_histogram_64bit_count Summary : This RFC modifies the GDALRasterBand GetHistogram(), GetDefaultHistogram() and SetDefaultHistogram() methods to accept arrays of 64-bit integer instead of the current arrays of 32-bit integer for bucket counts. This will fix issues when operating on large rasters that have more than 2 billion pixels. Even
-- Daniel Morissette T: +1 418-696-5056 #201 http://www.mapgears.com/ Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000 _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
