Etienne, Frank,
The original idea was to save space with the byte type, although I admit
bools are a rather unusual case. If we represent them as ints it might be
more straightforward just to use the int form of ValuesIO instead. How
about removing the bool form of ValuesIO and should a future
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Sam Gillingham gillingham@gmail.comwrote:
Etienne, Frank,
The original idea was to save space with the byte type, although I admit
bools are a rather unusual case. If we represent them as ints it might be
more straightforward just to use the int form of
Hi Frank,
I've updated the RFC.
Sam.
On 16 May 2013 10:26, Frank Warmerdam warmer...@pobox.com wrote:
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Sam Gillingham
gillingham@gmail.comwrote:
Etienne, Frank,
The original idea was to save space with the byte type, although I admit
bools are a
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sam Gillingham gillingham@gmail.comwrote:
Hi All,
I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - Improving performance of Raster
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sam Gillingham gillingham@gmail.comwrote:
Hi All,
I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - Improving performance of Raster
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
Best regards,
Frank
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sam Gillingham gillingham@gmail.comwrote:
Hi All,
I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - Improving performance of Raster
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Frank Warmerdam warmer...@pobox.comwrote:
Sam,
It looks good to me, though I'm dubious about the value of treating
booleans as Byte instead of integer.
everywhere else booleans are defined as integers like this
int bSomeVar;
Best regards,
Frank
On
Hi All,
I propose a motion to get RFC 40 - Improving performance of Raster
Attribute Table implementation for large tables adopted. This adds some
new functionality for GDAL 2.0. Even and others have made suggestions and
these have been incorporated into the RFC:
