[Marble-devel] Review Request: AbstractProjection: bring dateline issue as a projection topic

[Torsten Rahn]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/104175/#review11292
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Torsten Rahn


On March 6, 2012, 7:27 p.m., Thibaut Gridel wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/104175/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 6, 2012, 7:27 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Marble and Torsten Rahn.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Try to separate concerns between Geo coordinates and screen coordinates.
> IDL is supposed to be an issue for those projections which have repeatable X property.
> As a first attempt, the patch brings IDL calculation into the abstract projection.
> Next step is to move horizon and pole for spherical algo, and idl for flat maps.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/lib/Projections/AbstractProjection.cpp edac2a7 
>   src/lib/Projections/AbstractProjection_p.h a93ab13 
>   src/lib/geodata/data/GeoDataLineString.cpp b459dd8 
>   tests/CMakeLists.txt 8e80456 
>   tests/ProjectionTest.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/104175/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Projection test tries to handle the 3 tessellation modes across IDL functional cases onto some projections.
> Tests are generic enough to catch easy to break regressions.
> More tests for Horizon, pole, visibility and projection welcome!
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Thibaut Gridel
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/marble-devel/attachments/20120311/b886b686/attachment.html>