[GRASS-dev] Mixing vector and Raster input maps for a module

[Nikos Alexandris]

(Re-structuring this thread as I might need to share the discussion)

Nikos Alexandris wrote:

>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am concerned about mixing Vector and Raster maps as inputs in a
>> module. I think it's less of a complication if a module considers either
>> only Vector or Raster maps as inputs.
>>
>> Should I just not worry and mix these? The question is about
>> user-friendliness.
>>
>> If tha add-on is exposed to QGIS, non-experienced users will be able to
>> use it. Should they be forced to think about doing some rasterisation
>> themselves? Or should the module do this job for them?
>>
>> This is a generic question. I much appreciate your thoughts.
>>
>> Nikos

Huidae Cho:

>Nikos,
>
>I would personally keep modules simpler and make them do one task really
>well (Unix philosophy ;-) unless there are multiple related tasks that
>share a significant portion of the procedure. I would assume that
>rasterization is a pre-processing step that needs to be done before using
>your module, and it may not need to be done every time you run the module.
>If this pre-processing doesn't require any special treatments to the input
>raster, I would leave it out and just add some notes in the manual.
>
>Best,
>Huidae

Dear Huidae,
(Dear @grass-dev readers, I would appreciate additional feed-backers)

thank you for your thoughts.

Yes, the case is as you assume.

I work on an algorithm that is all raster based.
The prototype module is "overloaded" with multiple input options,
already.

While it is possible to use a vector map, to serve as a "base" map for
`v.rast.stats`, technically it is not required.

If nothing changes (for example, request for a vector output map from the
module), the outputs are all raster maps and one CSV file.

Is there an "independent" and "convincing" source, for non-programmers,
that not keeping a script simple, will eventually lead to code that is harder
to read, to test, to maintain, to update?

Thank you, Nikos
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20180808/ff859304/attachment.sig>