-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Upgrade/improved antimeridian logic #27
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
TODO - Add a specific test for comparing a DEM over the antimeridian |
Done ✅ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks great! I've made a few minor suggestions, and added a comment indicating where we may need to check that a modified set of bounds still falls within the valid extent ranges: y = (-90, 90), x = (-180, 180)
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good to me. I think there's still a few of my suggestions that haven't been accepted. I've also suggested we remove the unicode ticks, since I don't think we use them elsewhere.
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Caitlin Adams <[email protected]>
(left, bottom, right, top)left>rightsar-pipeline