[geos-devel] [postgis-devel] RFC6 - Require explicit configure to use the C++ API

[Regina Obe]

Glad it wasn't totally wasted effort and thanks for being so agreeable and explaining your use. 

 I also apologize for mistyping your name.

 

 

Thanks,

Regina

 

From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Kurt Schwehr
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 6:08 PM
To: GEOS Development List <geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] [postgis-devel] RFC6 - Require explicit configure to use the C++ API

 

I don't consider it a waste of time.  Thank you for taking the time for the RFC and especially for the summary. 

 

On Oct 3, 2017 12:44 PM, "Regina Obe" <lr at pcorp.us <mailto:lr at pcorp.us> > wrote:

After much heated argument on this mailing list and PostGIS IRC, none of the other PSC members seem interested in changing GEOS at all.

Hobu booed, strk didn't want to say anything, mloskot booed, pramsey was silent.

Dale and Keith ironically seemed to be the most agreeable folks using GEOS.

Hobu and Mloskot feel strongly that  GEOS C++ API is a major feature of GEOS and the key feature and if packagers feel strongly against allowing C++ API GEOS projects in the packages,
they should stop shipping the libgeos++-dev so users trying to use those will not be able to compile said projects against  a packaged GEOS.

I have marked the RFC as failed so it's there, we know we officially discussed it,  and officially shot it down.

https://trac.osgeo.org/geos/wiki/RFC6

Sorry for this waste of everyone's time,

Regina


-----Original Message-----
From: geos-devel [mailto:geos-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> ] On Behalf Of Sandro Santilli
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 2:32 PM
To: GEOS Development List <geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org> >
Subject: Re: [geos-devel] [postgis-devel] RFC6 - Drop GEOS C++ API at GEOS 3.8

On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 10:33:51AM -0400, Regina Obe wrote:

> Is there a way to get rid of the shared C++ library and just have a C library or is that what you were talking about with the static  C++ library.

That's what I'm talking about with the static-only C++ library.
The C library would then _include_ (statically link to) the
C++ library.

I'm not sure about the consequences of that though (guess we'd need more symbols hiding or it could still be possible for different versions of the embedded C++ library to be confused during code execution).

--strk;
_______________________________________________
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org> 
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel

_______________________________________________
geos-devel mailing list
geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geos-devel at lists.osgeo.org> 
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geos-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/attachments/20171003/ac863d37/attachment.html>