[GRASS-dev] [GRASS-SVN] r66515 - grass/branches/releasebranch_7_0/scripts/r.import

GRASS GIS GRASS GIS developer
,
1

Hi Martin,

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:36 PM, <svn_grass@osgeo.org> wrote:

Author: martinl
Date: 2015-10-16 03:36:02 -0700 (Fri, 16 Oct 2015)
New Revision: 66515

Modified:
   grass/branches/releasebranch_7_0/scripts/r.import/r.import.py
Log:
r.import: input is binary file
          (merge r66514 from trunk)

Modified: grass/branches/releasebranch_7_0/scripts/r.import/r.import.py

--- grass/branches/releasebranch_7_0/scripts/r.import/r.import.py 2015-10-16 10:32:56 UTC (rev 66514)
+++ grass/branches/releasebranch_7_0/scripts/r.import/r.import.py 2015-10-16 10:36:02 UTC (rev 66515)
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
#% keyword: import
#% keyword: projection
#%end
-#%option G_OPT_F_INPUT
+#%option G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT
#% description: Name of GDAL dataset to be imported
#% guisection: Input
#%end

I was wondering about that - but didn't understand what G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT means.
I used the r.in.gdal approach.

Which one is right?

Markus

2

Hi Markus,

2015-10-16 13:05 GMT+02:00 Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org>:

I was wondering about that - but didn't understand what G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT means.
I used the r.in.gdal approach.

G_OPT_F_INPUT adds to GUI dialog widget for "interactive input",
G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT not. In this case I think that right is
G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT (r.import dialog with interactive input is somehow
misleading for user POV I would say).

Ma

--
Martin Landa
http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/gwiki/Landa
http://gismentors.cz/mentors/landa

3

Hi Martin,

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Markus,

2015-10-16 13:05 GMT+02:00 Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org>:

I was wondering about that - but didn't understand what G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT means.
I used the r.in.gdal approach.

G_OPT_F_INPUT adds to GUI dialog widget for "interactive input",
G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT not. In this case I think that right is
G_OPT_F_BIN_INPUT (r.import dialog with interactive input is somehow
misleading for user POV I would say).

Yes, exactly. Thanks for having it updated.

BTW: where to add this explanation in the doxygen part?
parser_standard_options.c is not very detailed...

Markus