[OSRS-PROJ] Proj.4 vs Geotrans
Gerald I. Evenden
gerald.evenden at verizon.net
Sat Mar 29 22:18:57 EST 2003
Anything I say here is going to be interpreted as being catty but
I can't help it. Also it is only from a projection standpoint
and with no concern for datums. Also, it is a programmer's view.
I dragged down a copy of Geotrans to take a look at it.
1) it looks like it was written by a COBOL instructor. VERY
verbose and full of VERY long identifiers.
For the Mercator projection Geotrans took 373 lines while
PJ_merc.c takes 80.
2) coding is not written by a math programmer
For example: has no idea about nested polynomials among
3) on plus side there is a transverse equal area cylindrical
for the ellipse that I have not heard of.
But I have not heard of anyone who needs one either.
4) not very many projections
5) usage from a programmers stand point is messy and complex
with far too many globals. Very difficult to read.
I would translate the teac into libproj but I don't know if I
can figure out the code. As I say, it is VERY unreadable and
that is from someone used to writing inscrutable code.
>From a user's view it may be OK but from my viewpoint I would
only rate it 1.5 stars out of 5.
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 19:57, Jesus Angel del Pozo wrote:
> What are the main advantages of Proj.4 vs Geotrans?
> I think Geotrans has a more complete doc. Does exist a up to date doc of
> I'll use the conversion routines in a GUI program (not in a script).
PROJ.4 Discussion List
See http://www.remotesensing.org/proj for subscription, unsubscription
and other information.
More information about the Proj