[Gdal-dev] GDALDataset as a Base Class

[Mateusz Loskot]

Ivan Lucena wrote:
> Matt, All,
> 
> You are not alone, I don't mind use the pointer either.

Pointers are nothing bad, even good, but only if used correctly.

> See in the
> attachment an initial attempt to implement Michael Goodchild's Spatial
> Model (Well, at least GetExtent() is working identically for
> Fields[GDAL] and Objects[OGR] :-).

I'm not sure what to try to observe there.

> But what bugs me a little bit is the proliferation of wrapper and
> facades for GDAL that *we* are creating. For example, I am following the
> idea of VB6 GDAL wrapper and implementing a Delphi wrapper!

And? Something wrong with those wrappers? I've never seen them,
but again I'm not sure what is the problem here, if any.

> And I also believe that we can count the wrappers automatic created by
> swig because they also produce slightly different interfaces that
> requires especial documentation (and a separated support group from the
> gdal-dev list).
> 
> Any thoughts on that subject? 

Good wrappers are good :-)
No matter how created, manually or by generator.

> Any COM, CORBA, .Net idea?

Idea about what?
COM wrapper would good for Windows environment because COM
provides highest flexibility of reuse -> scripting
languages, .NET, VC6, and even C/C++ - without additional
wrapping layer.

So, personally if I'd need a GDAL wrapper for .NET, I'd go with COM.
Also COM-CORBA bridging is possible, but I don't see any
application here.

Cheers
-- 
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net