[geos-devel] GSoC Proposal : Expose PrecisionModel through C-API

[Varun Saraf]

Hi,

Please refer to the below link if you are not able to access my proposal
through the link I had shared in my previous mail.

http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/public/google/gsoc2014/varunsaraf/5668600916475904

Regards,
Varun Saraf


On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Varun Saraf <varunsaraf14 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Since today is the last day for submitting the proposal, it would be great
> to have some feedback on my proposal which I have submitted on melange [1].
> Also, GEOS is not listed on the OSGeo GSoC ideas wiki page [2] as of yet.
>
> Regards,
> Varun Saraf
>
> [1]
> http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/student/google/gsoc2014/varunsaraf/5668600916475904
> [2] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2014_Ideas
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Varun Saraf <varunsaraf14 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Below is the link to the initial draft of my proposal. Please have a look
>> and let me know. I have enabled comments so you can comment there itself.
>>
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MBGF1w5WNGuT4KSBtrT7uJRHRtfpx_J1ik03LKk9GJs/edit#
>>
>> Regards,
>> Varun Saraf
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Sean Gillies <sean.gillies at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 2:31 AM, Sandro Santilli <strk at keybit.net>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 12:24:19PM -0600, Sean Gillies wrote:
>>>> > On Mar 12, 2014 6:46 AM, "Sandro Santilli" <strk at keybit.net> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 06:16:00AM -0400, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>>>> > > > I would tend to expect choosing a single precision model and
>>>> working
>>>> > > > with it for a long time to be a more common usage than swapping
>>>> > > > between lots of models. My bias.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I also find this to be a more likely usecase.
>>>> >
>>>> > While agree that one model at a time (and two at the most) is the most
>>>> > likely use case, I'm concerned about designs that limit the number.
>>>> I'm
>>>> > also reversing myself on whether there should be a precision model in
>>>> the
>>>> > global context. I'd rather GEOS did not add more global state.
>>>> >
>>>> > Please see the wiki page
>>>> > http://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/GSoC/CAPI_PrecisionModel for my
>>>> (Shapely)
>>>> > requirements.
>>>>
>>>> So what would you think about "parking" a pointer to the client-owned
>>>> GeometryFactory into the "context" right before calling the geometry
>>>> creation functions ? Such "parking" method would return the old
>>>> GeometryFactory, so that you can pass it back. You'd only own the
>>>> GeometryFactory objects you'd have explicitly created.
>>>>
>>>> I'm talking about GeometryFactory rather than PrecisionModel because
>>>> the object referenced  by geometries is really a GeometryFactory,
>>>> not a PrecisionModel. A GeometryFactory also references a
>>>> CoordinateSequenceFactory.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds practical. Geometry objects will have to park their factories
>>> before every operation, right? Offloading complexity to client code seems
>>> fair enough.
>>>
>>> I've updated my wiki notes to refer to geometry factories instead of
>>> models.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sean Gillies
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> geos-devel mailing list
>>> geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/attachments/20140321/bb0e26d5/attachment.html>