[Loadstone] Checkpoints format

Shawn Kirkpatrick shawn at loadstone-gps.com
Sat Jun 14 08:01:38 BST 2008


You can insist all you want but the current checkpoint file format isn't 
changing any time soon without a very good reason. The current format solves 
a lot of problems that the previous format had and if we adopted your idea 
these problems would be reintroduced. Preventing a database file from being 
loaded as a checkpoint file is just a good idea. In theory you could have 
somewhere around 3000 checkpoints loaded if you didn't want anymore memory 
for anything else. In practice the program would probably become unusable.

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008, Przemys³aw Rogalski wrote:

> Hello,
> As I see, the checkpoints problem turns up like a bad penny here. Some new LS users complain on a current checkpoint format. OK, it's great that it contains more data than just coordinates, but I insist that it would be easier to create checkpoints if they were as much similar as possible to the database entries; I mean if:
> 1. Just point name, coordinates and comment were inserted into a checkpoint file (to make more place for comments).
> 2. Coordinates were exchanged with point name (thus point name went first).
> I know that the current format was made "to prevent user from creating large checkpoint files", but in my opinion it is user's responsibility of using checkpoints, especially because it has not yet been tested what is the maximum size of a checkpoint file, that would not break LS stability.
> A warning info in the documentation should be enough. The experience will show and time will tell how many points at the same time you can load. I can test it it, if needed.
> Przemyslaw
>
> _______________________________________________
> Loadstone mailing list
> Loadstone at loadstone-gps.com
> http://www.loadstone-gps.com/mailman/listinfo/loadstone
>


More information about the Loadstone mailing list