FutureWarning: Objects based on the Geometry class will deprecated and removed in a future version of libpysal
#779
Replies: 6 comments
-
|
I would recommend considering pygeoif for this functionality. PySAL's geometry types are not OGC-compliant, and were designed to match now outdated reference implementations of ESRI geometries. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@ljwolf Why not shapely? That's likely the most robust no? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I tend to disagree a bit in here. Installing shapely has not been an issue lately and while it is not pure python it is way more feature complete. And importantly, it is what most of the ecosystem uses. Let's pick it up on Thursday during the dev call to formulate some recommendations on where to point people. I have always assumed we do deprecate and suggest replacement by shapely as that is what we do internally but that might have been a wrong assumption. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
All of that is true. But, pysal geometry classes were written to avoid depending on geos. Hence I'd think a successor recommendation should include a non-geos option.I think if people can get it, shapely is the thing to use! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
xref #484 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I was searching for an alternative for the 'Geometry' class that will be deprecated and removed in a future version (undefined), I need to find a solution to be able to use 'Point' and 'Polygon' shapes precisely, but I couldn't find any documentation or previous issue concerning this subject, any idea when will it be deprecated and if there is any suggested solution ?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions