[mkgmap-dev] uncommitted patches for mkgmap

Sun Feb 17 15:39:40 GMT 2013

Hi WanMil,

thanks for the propsals. I've changed the code and committed it.
I kept the extra lines for the spike detection but moved them
to the beginning. You are right that the area test would detect
that as well, but this test is much simpler.

Gerd
P.S. The change in the order of points was indeed not intended.

WanMil wrote
> Hi Gerd,
> 
> filter_shapes_v1.patch:
> I did not test it but I made a little code review. That looks good. 
> Anyhow I have some comments:
> 
> You want to filter shapes only? (The comments also talk about filtering 
> lines).
> When working with shapes only I think in the end of the doFilter method 
> it should better be
> if (newPoints.size() > 3)
> ...
> instead of newPoints.size() > 1.
> 
> Maybe it's also better for quick understanding to cast to MapShape only 
> instead of working with a MapLine line object.
> 
> I stumbled a bit on the following part:
> int last = newPoints.size()-1;
> areaTest[0] = newPoints.get(last);
> areaTest[1] = newPoints.get(last-1);
> areaTest[2] = newP;
> It is correct but for a better reading I would leave the points in the 
> original order:
> int last = newPoints.size()-1;
> areaTest[0] = newPoints.get(last-1);
> areaTest[1] = newPoints.get(last);
> areaTest[2] = newP;
> 
> I wonder if the following part is required:
> if (newPoints.get(newPoints.size()-2).equals(newP)){
> 	// detected simple spike
> 	newPoints.remove(newPoints.size()-1);
> 	continue;
> }
> I think the simple spike is also covered with the area==0 test?
> 
> Maybe you could introduce a boolean flag if anything was changed by the 
> filter and create a new object only if that's true. Otherwise each shape 
> is recreated.
> 
> WanMil
> 
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got no feedback on these posts regarding patches:
>>
>> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Why-do-we-have-the-Area-too-small-to-split-at-message-tp5744612p5745299.html
>>
>> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/PATCH-v1-Optimize-filters-for-shapes-tp5744144p5745401.html
>>
>> I used both of them and I think they are ok. Is it okay to commit them?
>>
>> Gerd
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/uncommitted-patches-for-mkgmap-tp5749600.html
>> Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> _______________________________________________
>> mkgmap-dev mailing list
>> 

> mkgmap-dev at .org

>> http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list

> mkgmap-dev at .org

> http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/uncommitted-patches-for-mkgmap-tp5749600p5749692.html
Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.