Vaclav Petras wrote:
The only question is if wxpyimgview is as fast as wximgview. Speed
is the only reason why they exists, isn't it?
Not really. A fundamental property of those programs is that they will
dynamically update the display whenever the image file changes.
For display commands
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Glynn Clements
gl...@gclements.plus.com wrote:
Vaclav Petras wrote:
The only question is if wxpyimgview is as fast as wximgview. Speed
is the only reason why they exists, isn't it?
Not really. A fundamental property of those programs is that they will
Vaclav Petras wrote:
xganim removed in r58484 and r58487.
Do we want to keep wximgview (I believe that it has been superseded by
wximgview.py)? If not, we can remove the wxWidgets configure checks
altogether.
--
Glynn Clements gl...@gclements.plus.com
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Glynn Clements
gl...@gclements.plus.comwrote:
Vaclav Petras wrote:
xganim removed in r58484 and r58487.
Do we want to keep wximgview (I believe that it has been superseded by
wximgview.py)? If not, we can remove the wxWidgets configure checks
altogether.
Hi,
when testing the previous problems with C++11/clang/Mavericks, I used the
following compilation settings on Ubuntu 12.04:
export CC=clang
export CXX=clang++
export CFLAGS=-ggdb -Wall -Wextra -Werror-implicit-function-declaration
-Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations
Vasek,
I think that if there are no objections xganim can be removed from grass7, the
new animation tool is much, much better.
It may be worth keeping it in grass6.4*. To test xganim just use any output
from r.sim.water or r.sun.daily or nags head series.
If you are seeing window larger than
