Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixes to RasterRegionReproject #2880

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2019

Conversation

jpolchlo
Copy link
Contributor

@jpolchlo jpolchlo commented Mar 7, 2019

Overview

RasterRegionReproject is a touchy algorithm. Specifically, there is a mock scanline generation algorithm that takes place using a pretty weird geometric intersection algorithm. It is unfortunately useful for speeding up the computation of sampling points, so we're stuck with it. The problem is that the determination of bounds for converting these geometric line segments into a pixel range appears to be numerically touchy. I'm proposing a slight change to the numerical fudge factors that make the process work, but I understand that this is suspicious, and will possibly cause problems depending on the projection of the input points.

We can try to finesse this PR to do something more elegant and more correct through the review process.

Signed-off-by: jpolchlo [email protected]

Checklist

  • docs/CHANGELOG.rst updated, if necessary
  • docs guides update, if necessary
  • New user API has useful Scaladoc strings
  • Unit tests added for bug-fix or new feature

@metasim
Copy link
Member

metasim commented Mar 15, 2019

@jpolchlo Are there any API breaking changes in this PR... if so, having them in the release notes would be helpful for predicting level of effort in future downstream upgrades.

@pomadchin
Copy link
Member

Hey @metasim there are no API changes; precision fixes only. Considered as a ‘bad’ quick fix I suppose ._.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants