[GRASS-dev] [GRASS-SVN] r54302 - grass/trunk/scripts/r.mask

[Martin Landa]

Hi,

2012/12/16 Markus Metz <markus.metz.giswork at gmail.com>:

[...]

> This is not possible because r.reclass expects the (raster) maskcats
> syntax, not the (vector) cats syntax. Each syntax is well established

I was not clear enough, I thought to change r.reclass syntax too.

> and I don't think it's a good idea to sync the two (requiring too many
> low-level changes that are neither bug fixes nor performance
> improvements).

Is there any reason why syntax for raster and vector cats need to be
different? Or it's just historical artifact? Personally speaking,
syntax for vector categories seems to be more natural for me. Keeping
maskcats and cats could be quite misleading for the user. I think it's
good time to think about synchronization of the syntax for categories.
In other words, to change r.reclass to accept also vector cats syntax.
r.reclass could accept the both syntaxes - old (current) and new one
(vector based).

Martin

-- 
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa