Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v5] - merge nodes to remove evil short arcs
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c15b/0c15b3dfffec47b9e8fc5ed9ee7a394114b46664" alt=""
Mark. I compiled Italy right now with the last jar version you sent me (1044 + V5, I guess). GREAT! I've tryied to crash MapSource without any success (so far...): all roads I kew were problematic are now routable without issues. For your info, in Italy about 30/50 arcs seems to be "unroutable" (I'll try to correct them as soon as I have the OSM ID info). What to say more. Well done. As soon as you are confident to commit the patch in the trunk (I guess this is the right way to call what I called the mainstream mkgmap), I'll try the last version. Well, just a question: why if I put a wrong switch (like --delete-short-arcs) mkgmap does not tell me there is an unrecognized switch? I might use a wrong switch without knowing... Ciao, Marco.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0d78f/0d78f38077a2f8d435eb75b37ffab5d5fb801683" alt=""
Hi Marco,
I compiled Italy right now with the last jar version you sent me (1044 + V5, I guess).
GREAT!
I've tryied to crash MapSource without any success (so far...): all roads I kew were problematic are now routable without issues.
That's great.
For your info, in Italy about 30/50 arcs seems to be "unroutable" (I'll try to correct them as soon as I have the OSM ID info).
It's possible that the code that detects self intersecting ways is underperforming and it should be fixing those ways but is failing. So far, the only ways that I have seen it complaining about do have silly connections so maybe it's not a big problem. If you find any ways that really should be routable but are not, let me know.
What to say more. Well done. As soon as you are confident to commit the patch in the trunk (I guess this is the right way to call what I called the mainstream mkgmap), I'll try the last version.
Well, you should take a good chunk of the credit as you put time+thought into sorting out what was wrong. I will commit this soon (possibly tonight). As you have to specify an option to turn it on it will not cause any problems for people. In the future, it may be enabled by default but let's give it a trial period first.
Well, just a question: why if I put a wrong switch (like --delete-short-arcs) mkgmap does not tell me there is an unrecognized switch? I might use a wrong switch without knowing...
Yeah, it's a bummer but mkgmap doesn't keep track of what options are valid - the options are detected in whatever part of the code is interested in them but if you specify a bad option name, nothing notices. Should be fixed. Cheers, Mark
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c8507/c8507a9b36d2ae012454d358e06b6320aac0fa43" alt=""
by Mark
Yeah, it's a bummer but mkgmap doesn't keep track of what options are valid - the options are detected in whatever part of the code is interested in them but if you specify a bad option name, nothing notices. Should be fixed.
It would really be great if mkgmap checked whether an option is actually used or not and if you give a wrong option or say --style-file=test1 but test1 not existing it should not default to default values but complain about wrong option used. This would be much more beginner friendly.
participants (3)
-
Felix Hartmann
-
Marco Certelli
-
Mark Burton