[Gdal-dev] Re: C# Geometry Classes?

[Mateusz Loskot]

Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Tamas Szekeres wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> It would be a significant effort to discover which functionality
>> cannot be treated this way. For example it doesn't make too much sense
>> to support IsPointOnSurface on a Geometry class.
>> Sooner or later we should harmonize the C++ and the SWIG API or
>> support a separate documentation for the SWIG interface. Otherwise the
>> user will always search for specific methods described at the C++
>> documentation but missing from the SWIG interface.
> 
> Tamas,
> 
> I would agree that at the least we need to document the C API in an
> accessable manner.

Yes, I also think it's a good idea.

> Mateusz, please add this to your TODO list, and chat
> with me when you are ready to start so we can ensure it is findable.

OK.

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