My thought is that if C_2,0 is missing, that is a big problem and should result in an error, (as it does now) but if C_1,0 is missing, that is not a problem because we know C_1,0 is identically 0. Basically I think it should throw and exception when it is missing "real" data, but not when it is missing data that we know at compile time. Does this make sense? Regards, Evan On Fri 17 Jan 2014 02:17:04 PM EST, MAISONOBE Luc wrote: > Evan Ward <evan.ward@nrl.navy.mil> a écrit : > >> Hi, > > Hi Evan, > >> >> I was trying to parse the gravity field file for EGM2008 from [1], which >> does not specify the coefficients for degree 0 and 1. Current behavior >> is to initialize to NaN and then throw an exception if they are not >> specified. Since these coefficients are always zero I propose we >> initialize them to 0 instead of NaN in the GravityFieldReaders. What are >> your thoughts? This will be a small change in behavior without a change >> in the API. > > Doesn't the "missingCoefficientsAllowed" boolean parameter to the > EGMFormatReader precisely do that? > > Luc > >> >> Best Regards, >> Evan Ward >> >> [1] http://icgem.gfz-potsdam.de/ICGEM/modelstab.html >> >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. > >
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature