[fdo-internals] Follow-up on RFC 11

Dan Stoica dan.stoica at autodesk.com
Wed Sep 19 14:41:45 EDT 2007



I think Orest’s suggestion is even better for another reason: the names tell something not intuitive, i.e. the fact these functions are ignoring the Z value.





From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Orest Halustchak
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 2:20 PM
To: fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] Follow-up on RFC 11



Those names aren't bad. Another possibility is Length2D and Area2D (in anticipation of a future Length3D function).


------Original Message------
From: Thomas Knoell
To: FDO Internals Mail List
ReplyTo: FDO Internals Mail List
Sent: Sep 19, 2007 10:26 AM
Subject: [fdo-internals] Follow-up on RFC 11


The accepted RFC 11 proposed the implementation of the geometry functions Area and Length. Due to a name clash with the string function Length (see RFC 8), we propose to rename the geometry functions Area and Length to GeomArea and GeomLength.

We would appreciate any comments or suggestions on this issue.



Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20070919/6802a924/attachment.html

More information about the fdo-internals mailing list