[GRASSLIST:3501] Re: Geophysical/Potential field modules for GRASS?

Hamish hamish_nospam at yahoo.com
Thu May 27 04:49:04 EDT 2004

>> Michael
>>> Benjamin

[mix of replies here]

> > The creation of xy coordinates for a stream of data points along a 
> > transect would take new coding (the part I did in Excel).

If I get your meaning right, see 'r.profile -g'. This could be easily
added to r.transect.

see also 5.0/5.3's v.mkgrid.

Alternatively, some creative use of g.region + r.to.sites might be
useful for setting up a grid.

On the filtering side of things, may I suggest a g.parser shell script
with a filter option to launch them:

filter options:
all Run all filters sequentially
1   Run first filter
2   Run second filter
3   Run third filter
4   ...
9   Run ninth filter

e.g.  'r.filter.sh in=inputmap out=outputmap filter=all'
   ... filter=1,3,5,7-9
   ... filter=6,4,1

You need an option instead of flags if you want to be able to order the
running of discrete filters.

> > > Say -- wouldn't that save a lot of work and be
> > > so much more fun than batch scripting?

Someone has to do the scripting at least once....
The idea is to make the low level scripts good enough so the day to day
scripts can be small and easy. Making use of existing modules means less
chance of bugs, versus writing a whole new filtering app. Also has the
side effect of making the existing modules better with time.

> > GRASS has some pretty good interpolation 
> > modules. But there is a big hole in its lack of Krieging.

I think with the R-geostats interface, there is less motivation to
reinvent that.


More information about the grass-user mailing list