Opened 6 years ago

Closed 5 years ago

#2342 closed defect (fixed)

G7: deprecate r.los in favour of r.viewshed

Reported by: neteler Owned by: grass-dev@…
Priority: blocker Milestone: 7.0.0
Component: Raster Version: svn-releasebranch70
Keywords: r.los, r.viewshed Cc:
CPU: Unspecified Platform: All

Description

Given the long term testing of r.viewshed, are there objections to remove r.los from GRASS 7?

Here some related discussion from grass-dev:

On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Hamish wrote:

Michael wrote:

How does r.viewshed differ from r.los?

basically it is faster and it scales to large regions well.

I don't know the exact O()ness level of it, but r.los becomes very quickly slower after the region size gets bigger than a smallish amount of rows x columns, to the point where it becomes unusable.

...

from the code header comments:

  • The viewshed algorithm is efficient both in
  • terms of CPU operations and I/O operations. It has worst-case
  • complexity O(n lg n) in the RAM model and O(sort(n)) in the
  • I/O-model.  For the algorithm and all the other details see the
  • paper: "Computing Visibility on * Terrains in External Memory" by
  • Herman Haverkort, Laura Toma and Yi Zhuang.

Change History (7)

comment:1 Changed 5 years ago by neteler

Priority: normalblocker

comment:2 Changed 5 years ago by cmbarton

To avoid confusion and duplication of modules, I'm in favor of replacing r.los with r.viewshed. Then maybe we can do a cumulative view shed routine in the near future.

Michael

comment:3 in reply to:  2 ; Changed 5 years ago by martinl

Replying to cmbarton:

To avoid confusion and duplication of modules, I'm in favor of replacing r.los with r.viewshed. Then maybe we can do a cumulative view shed routine in the near future.

+1 (r.los can be moved to addons)

comment:4 in reply to:  3 ; Changed 5 years ago by martinl

Replying to martinl:

Replying to cmbarton:

To avoid confusion and duplication of modules, I'm in favor of replacing r.los with r.viewshed. Then maybe we can do a cumulative view shed routine in the near future.

+1 (r.los can be moved to addons)

If no objections I will do it in the next few days.

comment:5 in reply to:  4 ; Changed 5 years ago by wenzeslaus

Replying to martinl:

Replying to martinl:

Replying to cmbarton:

To avoid confusion and duplication of modules, I'm in favor of replacing r.los with r.viewshed. Then maybe we can do a cumulative view shed routine in the near future.

+1 (r.los can be moved to addons)

If no objections I will do it in the next few days.

I'm working on it now.

comment:6 in reply to:  5 Changed 5 years ago by martinl

Replying to wenzeslaus:

I'm working on it now.

cool, thanks.

comment:7 Changed 5 years ago by wenzeslaus

Resolution: fixed
Status: newclosed

r.los moved to addons in r61899 (trunk) and r61901 (7.0). Manual pages and toolboxes file changed too. Test which was using both moved to r.los. I don't know about any other occurrences or r.los in trunk.

It is backported and I tested that r.los is no more there, so closing.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.