[GRASS5] Inconsistencies among modules
Roger.Bivand at nhh.no
Thu Aug 9 07:30:15 EDT 2001
On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Rich Shepard wrote:
> > Two inconsistencies I've picked up:
> > 1) Some modules (e.g., r.in.gdal, r.patch) allow the use of an existing
> >output file name with no warning that that file already exists, and asking
> >the user if it's OK to overwrite it. Other modules (e.g., r.poly, v.digit)
> >tell the user that the output file name exists, does not ask for directions,
> >and refuses to let the user overwrite it. Recommendation: always check,
> >always ask, follow the user's directions.
> What would the normal mechanism be to ask the user if they want to overwrite
> an existing raster layer?
I would also take issue with a single policy. The R interface is currently
written to refuse to overwrite existing raster and site layers. I could
add an argument to the function in R to permit overwriting, but R
functions aren't interactive as such, so a user could set overwrite=TRUE
(default FALSE) and still clobber data.
Economic Geography Section, Department of Economics, Norwegian School of
Economics and Business Administration, Breiviksveien 40, N-5045 Bergen,
Norway. voice: +47 55 95 93 55; fax +47 55 95 93 93
e-mail: Roger.Bivand at nhh.no
and: Department of Geography and Regional Development, University of
Gdansk, al. Mar. J. Pilsudskiego 46, PL-81 378 Gdynia, Poland.
More information about the grass-dev