network profile
| bio | website | piemaster.net |
|---|---|---|
| location | Melbourne, Australia | |
| age | 24 | |
| visits | member for | 9 months |
| seen | Oct 15 '12 at 11:54 | |
| stats | profile views | 6 |
Programmer and aspiring software engineer with far more ideas than time.
|
Sep 4 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Sep 4 |
accepted | Is it good practice to manage all JTS spatial objects as abstract Geometry instances? |
|
Aug 31 |
comment |
Is it good practice to manage all JTS spatial objects as abstract Geometry instances? I would prefer to use Point for Points, but the JTS library does not appear to encourage this, since there's no apparent way to parse a WKT string directly into a Point; presumably it's parsed into a Point behind the scenes, but it's returned as a Geometry object. I realise I could cast it to a Point myself, but am wondering if I should, especially since basically every JTS function asks for Geometry parameters. I suspect I will in the end. |
|
Aug 30 |
comment |
Is it good practice to manage all JTS spatial objects as abstract Geometry instances? I agree, but it's still better than my old title. I always get a bit carried away :). I snuck a sneaky JTS back in anyway. |
|
Aug 30 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Aug 30 |
revised |
Is it good practice to manage all JTS spatial objects as abstract Geometry instances? edited title |
|
Aug 29 |
comment |
Is it good practice to manage all JTS spatial objects as abstract Geometry instances? Thanks vinayan, that's a very helpful answer from which I'm a little more confident that I'm not completely crazy. It makes some slightly unintuitive sense that Geometry could be used for everything. I realise that I drifted away from asking a precise question, so I'll see if any other 'opinions' come through before accepting. Cheers! |
|
Aug 29 |
awarded | Student |
|
Aug 29 |
asked | Is it good practice to manage all JTS spatial objects as abstract Geometry instances? |
|
Aug 28 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
|
Aug 28 |
awarded | Supporter |
