[GRASS-user] r.stats: negative cell counts and percentages
Hamish
hamish_b at yahoo.com
Thu Oct 1 09:34:32 EDT 2009
Hermann wrote:
> svn up https://svn.osgeo.org/grass/grass/branches/releasebranch_6_4 grass64_release
not that it matters here, but do you use 32 bit or 64 bit
CPU+OS?
> (on 8 Sptember 2009)
...
> >> I have the following raster map:
> >>
> >> Type of Map: raster
> Number of Categories: 255 Data
> Type: CELL Rows:
> 58000 Columns:
> 67000 Total
> Cells: 3886000000
> >>
> >> r.stats (-c and -p) tells me:
...
> >> I guess there is an integer overflow somewhere(?)
Yeah, I think you are right.
There are many int++'s in raster/r.stats/stats.c
Perhaps those counters++ should be changed to "long long"?
what is the result of r.univar ?
I see r.univar has been modified to use int for number of cells
and number of non-null cells. (earlier versions used unsigned
int, why the change?) But 'unsigned int' for the counter just
postpones the problem a couple of years, maybe long long is
better there?
Like r.info, I think r.univar and r.stats are pretty fundamental
raster modules to have working correctly for this.
#32bit linux system/gcc
sizeof(long long) is 8
sizeof(long) is 4
sizeof(int) is 4
#64bit linux system/gcc
sizeof(long long) is 8
sizeof(long) is 8
sizeof(int) is 4
I notice r.info uses unsigned long long + printf %llu
Shall we standardize on that? If it can be done without
dealing with --enable-lfs all the better, I'm pretty sure
that LFS has more to do with which 64bit friendly glibc
functions to use so not relevant. But I'm not 100% sure
about this stuff so I ask.
I'm guessing that off_t should only be used for addresses,
or if all else fails can it be repurposed?
Hamish
More information about the grass-user
mailing list