Hi
On 12.04.2013 09:51, Martin Dobias wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote:
Hi Martin,
On Thu, 11. Apr 2013 at 22:30:57 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
I have a feeling that we should call that a bug: the NoGeometry flag
tells that it is not necessary to fetch
Hi Martin,
On Wed, 24. Apr 2013 at 00:21:53 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
Which only moves the problem upward. Maybe we should handle setFilterFid
requests like the old featureAtId.
Could you be more specific what would that mean implementation-wise?
Handling the setFilterFid requests so
Hi Martin,
On Tue, 16. Apr 2013 at 09:32:08 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
IMHO that's not ok. If the provider doesn't support multiple iterators,
the second on should be rejected - forcing the caller to close the other
one first.
You're right - when thinking about it again, it makes more
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote:
Hi Martin,
On Tue, 16. Apr 2013 at 09:32:08 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
IMHO that's not ok. If the provider doesn't support multiple iterators,
the second on should be rejected - forcing the caller to close the other
one
Hi Martin,
On Mon, 15. Apr 2013 at 23:45:20 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
BTW what about parallel iterators? I suppose there were problems and thats
why you added the active iterators - do you recall which providers were
affected and how?
I have modified providers to have pointers to
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote:
Hi Martin,
On Mon, 15. Apr 2013 at 23:45:20 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
BTW what about parallel iterators? I suppose there were problems and thats
why you added the active iterators - do you recall which providers were
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote:
Recently I have been wondering whether it would not be better to
actually stop using flags and replace them by usual getter/setter
functions. My main concern is the setSubsetOfAttributes() function: it
also sets the flag, so the
Hi Martin,
On Thu, 11. Apr 2013 at 22:30:57 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
I have a feeling that we should call that a bug: the NoGeometry flag
tells that it is not necessary to fetch geometry... so even if the
flag is not set, the feature should be fetched.
Ok, then it's also misleading. Should
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote:
Hi Martin,
On Thu, 11. Apr 2013 at 22:30:57 +0200, Martin Dobias wrote:
I have a feeling that we should call that a bug: the NoGeometry flag
tells that it is not necessary to fetch geometry... so even if the
flag is not set,
Hi Juergen
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote:
if I do
feat = QgsFeature()
iter = myLayer.getFeatures(QgsFeatureRequest().setFilterFid(myFid))
iter.nextFeature(feat)
returns False and I get a message in the PostgreSQL message tab stating
Trying to fetch geometry
Hi,
I am trying to access features of a geometryless layer derived from a
PostgreSQL table in current master.
if I do
feat = QgsFeature()
iter = myLayer.getFeatures(QgsFeatureRequest().setFilterFid(myFid))
iter.nextFeature(feat)
returns False and I get a message in the PostgreSQL message tab
Jürgen,
this works!
I checked the docs for QgsVectorLayer.getFeatures and QgsFeatureIterator
but not for QgsFeatureRequest
thank you and all the best
Bernhard
Am 09.04.2013 18:10, schrieb Jürgen E. Fischer:
Hi Bernhard,
On Tue, 09. Apr 2013 at 15:09:31 +0200, Bernhard Ströbl wrote:
I am
12 matches
Mail list logo
