> I hope I fixed this problem or I missed something? Now:
>
> g.region -m == g.region -gm (== g.region -pgm)
Actually, I don't consider -gm => -gpm to be "correct"; what do you
use if you *only* want the resolution in metres, and not the region?
My original idea was to make the -g flag more "universal". It means
shell-style output used in combination with *other* print flags. This
cased a lot of problems.
AFAIK the -m flag is currently the same as the -mg (or now -mgp) flag
combination. I think it is not the right solution, the -m flag should
print *only* resolution as Glynn suggests.
I suppose to start implementing Glynn's proposal from the scratch --
the print parameter and to supersede the print flags, and in the
future versions of GRASS remove them. What do you think about it?
Explicitly adding -p in r.nulls is preferable, IMHO.
> > I hope I fixed this problem or I missed something? Now:
> >
> > g.region -m == g.region -gm (== g.region -pgm)
>
> Actually, I don't consider -gm => -gpm to be "correct"; what do you
> use if you *only* want the resolution in metres, and not the region?
My original idea was to make the -g flag more "universal". It means
shell-style output used in combination with *other* print flags. This
cased a lot of problems.
AFAIK the -m flag is currently the same as the -mg (or now -mgp) flag
combination. I think it is not the right solution, the -m flag should
print *only* resolution as Glynn suggests.
I suppose to start implementing Glynn's proposal from the scratch --
the print parameter and to supersede the print flags, and in the
future versions of GRASS remove them. What do you think about it?
For now, I suggest reverting the changes to the printing flags, and
thinking about a print= option instead. AFAICT, backwards
compatibility requires that the printing flags remain a mess.
One consequence is that you will need to duplicate printwindow.c.
Trying to make one version handle both the existing mess (which
essentially dictates that certain combinations of switches will print
various pieces of information in entirely different formats) and a
sane system will result in unmanageable complexity.
I hope I fixed this problem or I missed something? Now:
g.region -m == g.region -gm (== g.region -pgm)
Actually, I don't consider -gm => -gpm to be "correct"; what do you
use if you *only* want the resolution in metres, and not the region?
My original idea was to make the -g flag more "universal". It means
shell-style output used in combination with *other* print flags. This
cased a lot of problems.
AFAIK the -m flag is currently the same as the -mg (or now -mgp) flag
combination. I think it is not the right solution, the -m flag should
print *only* resolution as Glynn suggests.
I suppose to start implementing Glynn's proposal from the scratch --
the print parameter and to supersede the print flags, and in the
future versions of GRASS remove them. What do you think about it?
Explicitly adding -p in r.nulls is preferable, IMHO.
OK.
Martin
[CC: grassdev]
__________________________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University