Hi there, That is a great discussion and I applause Evens efforts and all the contributions, so but don't get me wrong by asking that:
What do we want to accomplish with that class hierarchy? Will GDAL 2.0 be able to do thinks like: $ gdalinfo <dataset> And the proposed classes will be able to figure out what kind of dataset is that? It could be: - raster file - vector file - cvs file or dbf file - some kind of server-based connection string for raster or vector - some kind of service connection string for raster or vector - multi-dataset raster file like HDF, NetCDF Will the GDAL Open mechanism probe for all those possibilities? My best regards, Ivan > From: [email protected] > Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 14:05:29 +0100 > To: [email protected] > CC: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [gdal-dev] Draft GDAL/OGR class hierarchy for GDAL 2.0 > > On 27 March 2014 13:40, Etienne Tourigny <[email protected]> wrote: > > How about multiple inheritance for mixed class? Say you have a class for > > rasters and a class for vectors, and a dataset that would support both types > > would inherit from these two base classes. Is that what you mean by > > composite? > > I meant separate base class for mixed dataset, then use "has a" > relationship, like in > > class MixedDataset > { > public: > // > private: > RasterDataset* pDtsR > VectorDataset* pDtsV; > } > > > Best regards, > -- > Mateusz Łoskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
