#454 closed enhancement (fixed)
ST_WrapX
Reported by: | strk | Owned by: | strk |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | blocker | Milestone: | PostGIS 2.3.0 |
Component: | postgis | Version: | master |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
Still looking for a good name, anyway the idea is to allow people to "split" a set of geometries in a table so that every component falling off a given X-value is X-shifted by a given amount. Tipical use is to make a wgs84 map visible as 0,360 rather than -180,180 or as whatever makes sense of a specific use (think pacific).
This was referred to as ST_ShiftLongitude on the mailing list http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-devel/2010-February/008886.html
But the "Longitude" part is misleading as it may be useful in mercator too for example..
Attachments (2)
Change History (14)
by , 15 years ago
Attachment: | longitudeWrap.sql added |
---|
comment:1 by , 15 years ago
Milestone: | → PostGIS 2.0.0 |
---|---|
Owner: | changed from | to
Status: | new → assigned |
comment:2 by , 15 years ago
Summary: | ST_Wrap ? → ST_HWrap |
---|
I think ST_HWrap is a good name. Now we have a name, half work is done
comment:3 by , 15 years ago
Summary: | ST_HWrap → ST_WrapX |
---|
HWrap I still didn't like as it assumes X is horizontal. So it's now called ST_WrapX. The attached version also makes use of the new ST_Split function and calls ST_Union as the last step.
Now it seems a pretty good and complete function to let down to C.
by , 15 years ago
Attachment: | ST_WrapX.sql added |
---|
comment:4 by , 13 years ago
Milestone: | PostGIS 2.0.0 → PostGIS Future |
---|---|
Version: | 1.5.X → trunk |
comment:5 by , 8 years ago
Milestone: | PostGIS Future → PostGIS 2.3.0 |
---|
I'm on this, will be included in 2.3.0
comment:7 by , 8 years ago
I'm getting a compile warn on this:
lwgeom_wrapx.c:26:9: warning: 'POSTGIS_DEBUG_LEVEL' macro redefined [-Wmacro-redefined] #define POSTGIS_DEBUG_LEVEL 4 ^ ./../postgis_config.h:123:9: note: previous definition is here #define POSTGIS_DEBUG_LEVEL 0
comment:8 by , 8 years ago
Priority: | medium → blocker |
---|---|
Resolution: | fixed |
Status: | closed → reopened |
I'm actually debugging a crash, so will reopen this until that is fixed.
comment:9 by , 8 years ago
Here's another warning for the hopper
lwgeom_wrapx.c:131:14: warning: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Wtautological-compare] while (--i>=0) lwgeom_free(wrap_geoms[i]); ~~~^ ~ 1 warning generated.
longitudeWrap version