[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [libredwg] Testing suite samples

From: Jake Abel
Subject: RE: [libredwg] Testing suite samples
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:31:25 -0500

Upon first impression I thought your library was written in C, but then I
saw the email earlier about a C++ patch.  If it's to be a C++ library, then
the API probably ought to look like Autodesk's C++ ObjectARX API (not
verbatim, of course).

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of
Felipe Sanches
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 2:56 PM
To: General discussion and developer's list for LibreDWG
Subject: Re: [libredwg] Testing suite samples

yes, that's our purpose: creating a library that supports reading and
writting of DWG files using free software.

SVG and GRASS are some secondary subjects here. There are some of our
strategies to implement the DWG library.

SVG is a vector file format that is weel known and well documented.
That's why we use it to test 2d features of our library. A  simple DWG2SVG
converter is one of the example applications that use LibreDWG.

GRASS is the first real big free-software project in which LibreDWG is going
to be used. Discussing how to integrate LibreDWG into GRASS can provide us
valuable insight on which features LibreDWG is missing, and what out API
should look like

Felipe Sanches

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Jake Abel <address@hidden>
> I don't mean to be insensitive, but after reading this mailing list 
> for a few days I've heard an awful lot about SVG files and GRASS 
> modules.  For what purpose was this project created?  I thought the 
> intention was to make a library that could natively access DWG files.
> -Jake
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On Behalf 
> Of Rodrigo Rodrigues da Silva
> Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 2:00 PM
> To: General discussion and developer's list for LibreDWG
> Subject: [libredwg] Testing suite samples
> It just came to my mind that maybe we're taking the wrong approach 
> building these samples. My point is: a dwg file created by a converter 
> and from an SVG file will be limited to the subset of entities and 
> objects supported by the converter. Besides, an SVG file carries less 
> information than a DWG file (we'll never get any DIMENSION, MESH or 
> 3DSOLID entities or an OLE2_CONTROL object from a SVG2DWG converter).
> That doesn't mean they're not useful, we can still test most of the 
> common 2D entities and run performance tests.
> I've got a couple of R2004 files that I can release to the public domain.
> Althoug, they are fairly simple and wouldn't cover all the objects and 
> entities, not even common ones like dimensions.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]