[gdal-dev] [OSGeo/gdal] Add GDT_Int8 support (RFC 87) (PR #6633)

[Even Rouault]

Sean,
>
> Changing GDT_Byte to unsigned char is too big of a change, I guess? I 
> can work with that.
GDT_Byte semantic is already unsigned char / uint8. What did you mean?
>
> Is there any advantage to a GDT_UInt8 type that can't be changed by a 
> PIXELTYPE option?

That would be super confusing if we had both GDT_Byte and GDT_UInt8 and 
they are not just simple aliases.

The PIXELTYPE option should die. The RFC proposes to make it die on the 
reading side (as a metadata item).

We could also make it die on the writing side as a creation option, but 
I didn't dare to do it right now and just propose this is considered a 
legacy deprecated way. Would certainly be something worth doing for a 
GDAL 4.0 if such thing ever happened.

>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2022 at 12:39 PM Even Rouault 
> <notifications at github.com> wrote:
>
>         Ubyte (same as uint8) vs byte?
>
>     what do you suggest exactly: keep GDT_Byte in the enumeration and
>     add |#define GDT_UByte GDT_Byte| to create the alias ?
>
>     —
>     Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
>     <https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/6633#issuecomment-1307736762>,
>     or unsubscribe
>     <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAIHIKG7X65SX4OULJMUFTWHKT5TANCNFSM6AAAAAAR2E6MJY>.
>     You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
>     <OSGeo/gdal/pull/6633/c1307736762 at github.com>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Sean Gillies
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev

-- 
http://www.spatialys.com
My software is free, but my time generally not.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20221109/599d3b8f/attachment.htm>