[Proj] Review of proj.4 pull request

[Kristian Evers]

Hi Janne,

Sure it is! At the moment there are around 20 known and unfixed bugs in proj.4. That’s just the nature of software… You are very welcome to improve the situation and compile a set of test coordinates that we can use in the existing test framework. Also, it would seem that Nathan is working on a fix, so things will probably be less messy in the near future.

Cheers,
Kristian

Fra: proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org [mailto:proj-bounces at lists.maptools.org] På vegne af support at mnspoint.com
Sendt: 20. oktober 2016 05:55
Til: PROJ.4 and general Projections Discussions
Emne: Re: [Proj] Review of proj.4 pull request


I just hope that this messy untested stuff (PJ_isea.c) is not in the official distribution of Proj.4 ?!



Janne.



-----------------------------------



Kurt Schwehr kirjoitti 27.09.2016 08:35:
Try #2 to the proj mailing list now that I've actually confirmed my email address :)

There is no rush on this.  It was just a dead code complaint by a linter, not a failure seen with actual code.

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Nathan Wagner <nw at hydaspes.if.org<mailto:nw at hydaspes.if.org>> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 06:42:58PM -0500, Howard Butler wrote:
> > On Sep 26, 2016, at 4:04 PM, Kurt Schwehr <schwehr at gmail.com<mailto:schwehr at gmail.com>> wrote:

> > The code says it was written by Nathan, so that would likely be the
> > best one of you to give it a look over, but maybe someone else might
> > know.

> > Any chance one of you could take a look at pr 418?  It's my first
> > proj.4 patch...  Am I missing anything with this?  Was there a
> > missing if?

> > https://github.com/OSGeo/proj.4/pull/418

> Please bring this up on the proj4 list, as I am happy to approve all
> changesets that do not disrupt the tests -- for both good and bad ;)

I'm looking into it.  I'll have an answer later tonight.  Three to four
hours.  Preliminary conclusion is that I had no idea what I was thinking
when I wrote that code, and the code after the return is the right code,
but maybe there's a bug or something that I missed.  My tests don't
exercise that code path.

--
nw



--
--
http://schwehr.org

_______________________________________________
Proj mailing list
Proj at lists.maptools.org<mailto:Proj at lists.maptools.org>
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/proj/attachments/20161020/6faa9560/attachment.html>