(Was "Want GNU libavl ?" 6 monts ago
http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass5/2002-January/001704.html )
> > The latest GLib is probably the closest I can think of. It has hashes,
> > trees, sets, etc... The reason I went with libavl, is it is purportedly
> > better optimised for the balanced trees, and it's simple to include the
> > files you need (two in my case).
>
> I see... but GLib is at the core of the GNOME programming environment...
> is it possible to extract only the more general part without having to
> carry also GNOME dependacies?
>
GLIB can be used alone. It is why they made it a separate lib.
--
Robert Lagacé, professeur
Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
If yes, how? As is or should we write some wrappers in Grass?
If wrappers, then is anybody here who can do that, I don't
have neither capacity nor knowledges.
If no, what to do instead?
Radim
Radim Blazek writes:
> Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
>
> If yes, how?
Replace sprintf with g_snprintf, as a start.
--
-russ nelson http://russnelson.com | I don't want to give up
Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | essential liberty to obtain
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | a little temporary safety.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | Is anyone listening to me?
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 04:51:29PM +0200, Radim Blazek wrote:
(Was "Want GNU libavl ?" 6 monts ago
http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass5/2002-January/001704.html )
> > > The latest GLib is probably the closest I can think of. It has hashes,
> > > trees, sets, etc... The reason I went with libavl, is it is purportedly
> > > better optimised for the balanced trees, and it's simple to include the
> > > files you need (two in my case).
> >
> > I see... but GLib is at the core of the GNOME programming environment...
> > is it possible to extract only the more general part without having to
> > carry also GNOME dependacies?
> >
> GLIB can be used alone. It is why they made it a separate lib.
> --
> Robert Lagacé, professeur
Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
I'm sceptical.
Why this library? Why a library at all.
Why not wait until grass 5.3?
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002 16:51:29 +0200
Radim Blazek <blazek@itc.it> wrote:
(Was "Want GNU libavl ?" 6 monts ago
http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass5/2002-January/001704.html )
> > > The latest GLib is probably the closest I can think of. It has
> > > hashes, trees, sets, etc... The reason I went with libavl, is it
> > > is purportedly better optimised for the balanced trees, and it's
> > > simple to include the files you need (two in my case).
> >
> > I see... but GLib is at the core of the GNOME programming
> > environment... is it possible to extract only the more general part
> > without having to carry also GNOME dependacies?
> >
> GLIB can be used alone. It is why they made it a separate lib.
> --
> Robert Lagacé, professeur
Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
If yes, how? As is or should we write some wrappers in Grass?
If wrappers, then is anybody here who can do that, I don't
have neither capacity nor knowledges.
I don't think that you would need a wrapper; at most for some funny
basic type definitions, which Grass most probably already has in a
different form. But IIRC there is also memory management in glib which
might conflict with grass' calls. Personally, I tried to use it about
a year ago, but didn't like it very much (don't recall why). The fact
is, that I wrote a library for list management of my own. It's much
less complete and has no support for (balanced) trees, but seems to
work well for me.
I don't know libavl.
--
Christoph Simon
ciccio@kiosknet.com.br
---
^X^C
q
quit
:q
^C
end
x
exit
ZZ
^D
?
help
.
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 05:35:51PM +0200, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 04:51:29PM +0200, Radim Blazek wrote:
> (Was "Want GNU libavl ?" 6 monts ago
> http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass5/2002-January/001704.html )
>
> > > > The latest GLib is probably the closest I can think of. It has hashes,
> > > > trees, sets, etc... The reason I went with libavl, is it is purportedly
> > > > better optimised for the balanced trees, and it's simple to include the
> > > > files you need (two in my case).
> > >
> > > I see... but GLib is at the core of the GNOME programming environment...
> > > is it possible to extract only the more general part without having to
> > > carry also GNOME dependacies?
> > >
> > GLIB can be used alone. It is why they made it a separate lib.
> > --
> > Robert Lagacé, professeur
>
> Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
I'm sceptical.
Why this library? Why a library at all.
Why not? It fills a gap.
Why not wait until grass 5.3?
?
Aehm - the last sentence is not clear to me. As we *need* functions,
we *want* GLib which provides the desired functions. Waiting doesn't
help since the functions are not yet present in GRASS.
There will be no 5.3 if there is no 5.1.
Markus
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 05:35:51PM +0200, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 04:51:29PM +0200, Radim Blazek wrote:
> (Was "Want GNU libavl ?" 6 monts ago
> http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass5/2002-January/001704.html )
>
> > > > The latest GLib is probably the closest I can think of. It has hashes,
> > > > trees, sets, etc... The reason I went with libavl, is it is purportedly
> > > > better optimised for the balanced trees, and it's simple to include the
> > > > files you need (two in my case).
> > >
> > > I see... but GLib is at the core of the GNOME programming environment...
> > > is it possible to extract only the more general part without having to
> > > carry also GNOME dependacies?
> > >
> > GLIB can be used alone. It is why they made it a separate lib.
> > --
> > Robert Lagacé, professeur
>
> Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
I'm sceptical.
Why this library?
... of course it should be discussed which library (whatever) to
use to get the set of needed functions.
[...]
Markus
On Thursday 06 June 2002 17:58, Markus Neteler wrote:
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 05:35:51PM +0200, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 04:51:29PM +0200, Radim Blazek wrote:
> > (Was "Want GNU libavl ?" 6 monts ago
> > http://grass.itc.it/pipermail/grass5/2002-January/001704.html )
> >
> > > > > The latest GLib is probably the closest I can think of. It has
> > > > > hashes, trees, sets, etc... The reason I went with libavl, is it
> > > > > is purportedly better optimised for the balanced trees, and it's
> > > > > simple to include the files you need (two in my case).
> > > >
> > > > I see... but GLib is at the core of the GNOME programming
> > > > environment... is it possible to extract only the more general part
> > > > without having to carry also GNOME dependacies?
> > >
> > > GLIB can be used alone. It is why they made it a separate lib.
> > > --
> > > Robert Lagacé, professeur
> >
> > Can we start to use GLib in grass51?
>
> I'm sceptical.
> Why this library?
... of course it should be discussed which library (whatever) to
use to get the set of needed functions.
I think that, apart from GLib, libavl is an excellent solution for balanced
trees (AVL and RedBlack). The 'problem' I see is that if everybody imports
its own typical libavl '2 files', you'll have many instances of them spread
under different dirs. It could be better to add libavl algorithms in a core
GRASS lib and use them instead of local copies. Or otherwise produce a
libGavl.a somewhere and link to that.
--
Roberto