[GRASS5] TODOs - Wishes for 5.0.3

[Helena]

Glynn Clements wrote:
> 
> Markus Neteler wrote:
> 
> > since we have a long list of new developments/improvements in
> > CVS HEAD, it's time to think about the next release.
> > Question is what we would like to see in 5.0.3 and
> > what should go into 5.1/5.2 instead.
> >
> > What I would like to see in 5.0.3:
> 
> > - many small things, to be checked with cvs diff to
> >   the release branch
> 
> The relevant script is tools/diff.sh.
> 
> > - r.terraflow, r.simwe, ...?
> 
> I don't think that we should put r.terraflow into 5.0.x. To support
> C++ properly requires non-trivial changes to the build system, which
> would be best left for 5.1.
> 
> Actually, I don't think that we should put r.terraflow anywhere until
> someone is willing to make it portable rather than just declaring that
> "you must use gcc".

I think that r.terraflow is OK in experimental GRASS in
src.contrib/DUKE.
This has some relation to the v.in.dgw discussion as this is another 
example of a code that cannot be put into core GRASS release, but that
is needed and should be made available e.g. in src.contrib and users
will
have to compile it separately (SG3d was similar case too). 
For an illustration, we did stream extraction for Panama
from 10000x10000 IFSARE-based DEM and we had to kill r.watershed after
17 days,
while r.terraflow did it in 3.5 hours on the same computer. 
Laura tried to use her original C-code,
but she had to use the newer C++ version of the code to get that
performance.
She will hopefully add more options to the module and then we can have a
second look at it,
but I am not sure what she will be able to do. At this point I am glad
that we have it.
If anybody wants to look at it and make it portable that would be the
best solution.

Helena  


   > 
> --
> Glynn Clements <glynn.clements at virgin.net>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> grass5 mailing list
> grass5 at grass.itc.it
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass5