Jürgen Buchmüller
2014-01-22 03:07:26 UTC
It looks like TIFF_SETGET_C0_DOUBLE has no case in the switch in
tif_dirread.c
I would have liked to use it to support TIFFTAG_GPSIFD reading/writing
through a custom TIFFFieldArray, where several tags expect a fixed
number of 3 rationals, i.e. degrees, minutes, seconds.
I could of course go back to TIFF_SETGET_C0_FLOAT in my custom TIFFField
array, which may be sufficiently precise for almost any use case. Or I
could use TIFF_SETGET_C16_DOUBLE, which it looks like has its case in
the switch statement...
However the entire recently included exifFields[] array in tif_dirinfo.c
uses double for the rational fields defined in EXIF, so may I ask if the
omission of TIFF_SETGET_C0_DOUBLE is intentional or just because no one
realized it's missing?
Jürgen
_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: ***@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://w
tif_dirread.c
I would have liked to use it to support TIFFTAG_GPSIFD reading/writing
through a custom TIFFFieldArray, where several tags expect a fixed
number of 3 rationals, i.e. degrees, minutes, seconds.
I could of course go back to TIFF_SETGET_C0_FLOAT in my custom TIFFField
array, which may be sufficiently precise for almost any use case. Or I
could use TIFF_SETGET_C16_DOUBLE, which it looks like has its case in
the switch statement...
However the entire recently included exifFields[] array in tif_dirinfo.c
uses double for the rational fields defined in EXIF, so may I ask if the
omission of TIFF_SETGET_C0_DOUBLE is intentional or just because no one
realized it's missing?
Jürgen
_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: ***@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://w