in reality the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have there category 1; category 1)
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and correct manually.
in reality *the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have
there category 1; category 1)*
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and
correct manually.
in reality the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have there category 1; category 1)
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and correct manually.
With the -z flag zero data values are not crossed. This means that if a
zero category value occurs in any input data layer, the combination is
assigned to category zero in the resulting map layer, even if other data
layers contain non-zero data. In the example given above, use of the -z
option would cause 3 categories to be generated instead of 5.
By the way, it should be: "In the following example..." and not "In the
example given above...".
With the -z flag zero data values are not crossed. This means that if a
zero category value occurs in any input data layer, the combination is
assigned to category zero in the resulting map layer, even if other data
layers contain non-zero data. In the example given above, use of the -z
option would cause 3 categories to be generated instead of 5.
By the way, it should be: “In the following example…” and not “In the
example given above…”.
in reality the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have
there category 1; category 1)
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and
correct manually.
could you fix it?
Please try trunk r72281
Works for me, thank you.
What about the -z flag, though?
The manual reads:
With the -z flag zero data values are not crossed. This means that if a
zero category value occurs in any input data layer, the combination is
assigned to category zero in the resulting map layer, even if other data
layers contain non-zero data. In the example given above, use of the -z
option would cause 3 categories to be generated instead of 5.
The -z flag does not behave as explained in the manual. It comes from the old days when there was no NULL encoding in GRASS, and zero was used as nodata. Now the -z flag means that with the -z flag, NULL values are not crossed, not that zero data are not crossed. This has been introduced in 2013 with r55276. The results of r.cross without the -z flag might look strange if any of the input maps contains NULL cells.
Markus M
By the way, it should be: “In the following example…” and not “In the
example given above…”.
in reality the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have
there category 1; category 1)
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and
correct manually.
could you fix it?
Please try trunk r72281
Works for me, thank you.
What about the -z flag, though?
The manual reads:
With the -z flag zero data values are not crossed. This means that if a
zero category value occurs in any input data layer, the combination is
assigned to category zero in the resulting map layer, even if other data
layers contain non-zero data. In the example given above, use of the -z
option would cause 3 categories to be generated instead of 5.
The -z flag does not behave as explained in the manual. It comes from the
old days when there was no NULL encoding in GRASS, and zero was used as
nodata. Now the -z flag means that with the -z flag, NULL values are not
crossed, not that zero data are not crossed. This has been introduced in
2013 with r55276. The results of r.cross without the -z flag might look
strange if any of the input maps contains NULL cells.
Markus M
Maybe renaming to -n (in future versions) ?
Nikos
By the way, it should be: "In the following example..." and not "In the
example given above...".
in reality the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have
there category 1; category 1)
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and
correct manually.
could you fix it?
Please try trunk r72281
Works for me, thank you.
What about the -z flag, though?
The manual reads:
With the -z flag zero data values are not crossed. This means that if a
zero category value occurs in any input data layer, the combination is
assigned to category zero in the resulting map layer, even if other data
layers contain non-zero data. In the example given above, use of the -z
option would cause 3 categories to be generated instead of 5.
The -z flag does not behave as explained in the manual. It comes from the old days when there was no NULL encoding in GRASS, and zero was used as nodata. Now the -z flag means that with the -z flag, NULL values are not crossed, not that zero data are not crossed. This has been introduced in 2013 with r55276. The results of r.cross without the -z flag might look strange if any of the input maps contains NULL cells.
The manual has been updated in r72285 to explain the current (as of r55276) behaviour with regard to the -z flag. Additionally, NULL values get now the label “NULL”.
Markus M
By the way, it should be: “In the following example…” and not “In the
example given above…”.
ok thanks
but in my case the combination existed (there was not a null value problem), the command skipped the first combination (category 1 with category 1).
in reality the first combination exists (0 is empty but I should have
there category 1; category 1)
the problem is that I have to iterate on 700 cases and I wont check and
correct manually.
could you fix it?
Please try trunk r72281
Works for me, thank you.
What about the -z flag, though?
The manual reads:
With the -z flag zero data values are not crossed. This means that if a
zero category value occurs in any input data layer, the combination is
assigned to category zero in the resulting map layer, even if other data
layers contain non-zero data. In the example given above, use of the -z
option would cause 3 categories to be generated instead of 5.
The -z flag does not behave as explained in the manual. It comes from the old days when there was no NULL encoding in GRASS, and zero was used as nodata. Now the -z flag means that with the -z flag, NULL values are not crossed, not that zero data are not crossed. This has been introduced in 2013 with r55276. The results of r.cross without the -z flag might look strange if any of the input maps contains NULL cells.
The manual has been updated in r72285 to explain the current (as of r55276) behaviour with regard to the -z flag. Additionally, NULL values get now the label “NULL”.
Markus M
By the way, it should be: “In the following example…” and not “In the
example given above…”.