Collect road restrictions in feature id term on generation step. #4567

bykoianko · 2016-10-27T10:09:51Z

PR реализует следующее.
1.
На первом и втором проходе генерации собираются ограничения проездов в osm id и mapping из osm id в feature id. Примерно вот так:

file: restrictions_in_osm_id.csv
No, 157616943, 157616943,
No, 5185062, 395192830,
No, 37914683, 37914683,
Only, 265752848, 265752852,
No, 48601078, 5185021,
No, 48601078, 48601078,

file: feature_id_to_osm_ids.csv
778192, 421826190,
778193, 421829987,
778194, 421829988,
778195, 421829989,
778196, 421829990,
778197, 421829991,
778198, 421829992,
778199, 421829993,

Названия файлов задаются параметрами generator_tool примерно вот так:
--restriction_name="restrictions.csv"
--feature_id_to_osm_ids_name="feature_id_to_osm_ids.csv"

Если у generator_tool задан параметр --generate_routing, то будет создана секция routing и в нее будут положены restrictions. В дальнейшем в нее же будет добавлен и граф дорог в PR-те @dobriy-eeh (ожидается 7-го ноября).
Рестрикшены уже хранятся в компактном виде. В Москве 10K рестрикшенов. Для них потребовалось 37KB. Update: 32KB.

@ygorshenin @mpimenov @syershov @Zverik @dobriy-eeh PTAL

mapsmetest · 2016-10-27T12:00:32Z

DUDE JTTP

dobriy-eeh · 2016-10-27T12:45:21Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+  return m_links < restriction.m_links;
+}
+
+RestrictionCollector::~RestrictionCollector() {}


Он ничего не делает, можно удалить

Спасибо, удалил.

dobriy-eeh · 2016-10-27T12:53:27Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+{
+  vector<string> const restrictionTypesNo = {"no_right_turn", "no_left_turn", "no_u_turn",
+                                             "no_straight_on", "no_entry", "no_exit"};
+  vector<string> const restrictionTypesOnly = {"only_right_turn", "only_left_turn", "only_straight_on"};


А зачем? Они же в анонимном namespace.

Поправил

bykoianko · 2016-10-27T14:43:08Z

@syershov @Zverik @dobriy-eeh PTAL

syershov · 2016-10-28T08:57:01Z

generator/osm_translator.hpp

@@ -134,6 +150,9 @@ class RelationTagsWay : public RelationTagsBase
    if (TBase::IsSkipRelation(type) || type == "route")
      return;

+    if (type == "restriction")
+      m_restrictionCollector.AddRestriction(e);


Тут точно не надо добавить return ?

Добавил

syershov · 2016-10-28T08:59:28Z

generator/osm_translator.hpp

@@ -289,11 +308,12 @@ class OsmToFeatureTranslator
    }
  }

-  void EmitLine(FeatureBuilder1 & ft, FeatureParams params, bool isCoastLine) const
+  void EmitLine(FeatureBuilder1 & ft, FeatureParams params, bool isCoastLine, osm::Id id) const


Может не надо передавать osm::Id, а сразу выставлять его для FeatureBuilder1 ?

Вообще удалил AddOsmId. И так добавляется.

syershov · 2016-10-28T09:21:02Z

generator/osm_translator.hpp

 protected:
  void Process(RelationElement const & e) override
  {
    string const & type = e.GetType();
    if (TBase::IsSkipRelation(type))
      return;

+    if (type == "restriction")
+      m_restrictionCollector.AddRestriction(e);


syershov · 2016-10-28T09:26:31Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+    return;
+
+  LOG(LINFO, ("Saving intermediate file with restrictions to", fullPath));
+  ofstream ofs(fullPath, std::ofstream::out);


Добавить проверку на ошибки открытия

Добавил

syershov · 2016-10-28T09:27:26Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+  }
+}
+
+string DebugPrint(RestrictionCollector::Type const & type)


syershov · 2016-10-28T09:28:46Z

generator/restrictions.hpp

+
+class RelationElement;
+
+namespace std


Не хорошо пихать что-то в std

Оказывается можно без namespace std

dobriy-eeh · 2016-10-28T09:49:40Z

LGTM

bykoianko · 2016-10-28T11:55:50Z

@syershov PTAL

syershov · 2016-10-28T12:04:52Z

generator/polygonizer.hpp

@@ -167,6 +170,10 @@ namespace feature
      m_currentNames += country->m_name;

      (*(m_Buckets[country->m_index]))(fb);
+      uint32_t const nextFeatureId = m_Buckets[country->m_index]->GetNextFeatureId();


Для этой строчки и выше можно обобщить

auto & bucket = *(m_Buckets[country->m_index]); bucket(fb); uint32_t const nextFeatureId = bucket.GetNextFeatureId();

Сделал

syershov · 2016-10-28T12:08:07Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+    if (fid == kInvalidFeatureId)
+      return false;
+  }
+  return true;


return find(begin(m_links), end(m_links), kInvalidFeatureId) == end(m_links);

syershov · 2016-10-28T12:09:04Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+  m_restrictions.emplace_back(type, links.size());
+  size_t const restrictionCount = m_restrictions.size() - 1;
+  for (size_t i = 0; i < links.size(); ++i)
+    m_restrictionIndex.push_back(make_pair(links[i], Index({restrictionCount, i})));


emplace_back?

Тогда будет вызван конструктор make_pair непосредственно. А так можно использовать make_pair.

Поправил:

for (size_t i = 0; i < osmIds.size(); ++i) m_restrictionIndex.emplace_back(osmIds[i], Index({restrictionCount, i}));

syershov · 2016-10-28T12:14:01Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+    if (!restriction.IsValid())
+      return false;
+  }
+  return true;


return find_if(begin(m_restrictions), end(m_restrictions, [](Restriction const & r){ return !r.IsValid(); }))) == end(m_restrictions);

syershov · 2016-10-28T12:15:07Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+  size_t const restrictionSz = m_restrictions.size();
+  for (pair<osm::Id, Index> const & osmIdAndIndex : m_restrictionIndex)
+  {
+    Index const index = osmIdAndIndex.second;


syershov · 2016-10-28T12:15:23Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+    Restriction & restriction = m_restrictions[index.m_restrictionNumber];
+    CHECK_LESS(index.m_linkNumber, restriction.m_links.size(), ());
+
+    osm::Id const osmId = osmIdAndIndex.first;


Хотя, лучше оставить по значению. По тем тестам, что известны мне - int64 было чуть быстрее, чем ссылка.

Сделал по ссылке

syershov · 2016-10-28T12:15:57Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+    if (distance(rangeId.first, rangeId.second) != 1)
+      continue; // |osmId| mentioned in restrictions was included in more than one feature.
+
+    FeatureId const featureId = rangeId.first->second;


int32 будет быстрее, чем ссылка

mpimenov · 2016-10-28T13:36:41Z

NOT LGTM
Обсудили голосом и пришли к следующему.
Надо делать в два независимых приёма: один строит таблицу соответствия osm_id <-> feature_id (которая пригодится как минимум ещё и для отладки и которая,
как ни странно, не существовала до сих пор);
второй вытягивает информацию по тэгу "restriction" в отдельную структуру,
работая с osm_id (которые и записаны в значениях тэга).
Потом отдельным проходом ограничения восстанавливают feature_id, к
которым они должны применяться, и дописываются в секцию к дорожному графу.
В результате работа с ограничениями в генераторе сводится к обработке
соответствующих тэгов, а на базовый уровень (вплоть до EmitFeature) выносится
вполне себе базовая идея соответствия наших и осмовских номеров.

Используются ограничения на лету на клиенте: мы не можем менять граф в генераторе,
т.к. граф хранится один для всех типов маршрутизации, а ограничения для
них могут быть разные.

mpimenov · 2016-10-28T12:19:10Z

generator/restrictions.hpp

+{
+  size_t operator()(osm::Id const & id) const
+  {
+    return hash<double>()(id.OsmId());


Зачем double?

Тут должно быть uint64_t

Введу изменения в RestrictionCollector надобность в этих строчка отпала.

mpimenov · 2016-10-28T12:23:06Z

generator/restrictions.hpp

+/// their road feature in text file for using later.
+class RestrictionCollector
+{
+  friend void UnitTest_RestrictionTest_ValidCase();


Зачем? Почему бы не сделать CheckCorrectness() и прочее public?

RestrictionCollector расчитан на многопоточную среду. Мьютексы расставлены так, что он готово только к вызовам открытых методов;

Тесты иногда обращаются к данным членам этого RestrictionCollector;

CheckCorrectness и другие вызываются из открытых методов и текущее использование кода (кроме тестов) не подразумевает их вызов не зависимо.

А нельзя ли здесь использовать UNIT_CLASS_TEST и сделать ровно один friend?

Для чего здесь нужна многопоточная среда? Почему нельзя в один поток? Можешь объяснить, откуда берутся несколько потоков?

Наверно не стоит. Можно сделать другом класс - первый параметр в UNIT_CLASS_TEST и реализовать в нем методы, которые будут обращаться к закрытым полям/методам RestrictionCollector. Но код будет выглядит не очень. Примерно так:

class RestrictionCollectorTest { RestrictionCollector m_restrictionCollector; public: RestrictionCollectorTest() : m_restrictionCollector("", "") {} void AddRestriction(RestrictionCollector::Type type, vector<uint64_t> const & osmIds) { m_restrictionCollector.AddRestriction(type, osmIds); } void ComposeRestrictions() { m_restrictionCollector.ComposeRestrictions(); } .... RestrictionCollector & Inst() { return m_restrictionCollector; } }; UNIT_CLASS_TEST(RestrictionCollectorTest, RestrictionTest_ValidCase) { // Adding restrictions and feature ids to restrictionCollector in mixed order. AddRestriction(RestrictionCollector::Type::No, {1, 2} /* osmIds */); Inst().AddFeatureId(30 /* featureId */, {3} /* osmIds */); AddRestriction(RestrictionCollector::Type::No, {2, 3} /* osmIds */); Inst().AddFeatureId(10 /* featureId */, {1} /* osmIds */); Inst().AddFeatureId(50 /* featureId */, {5} /* osmIds */); AddRestriction(RestrictionCollector::Type::Only, {5, 7} /* osmIds */); Inst().AddFeatureId(70 /* featureId */, {7} /* osmIds */); Inst().AddFeatureId(20 /* featureId */, {2} /* osmIds */); ...

Мне кажется, что при этом тест теряет наглядность. Т.е. мы то обращаемся к Inst(), то непосредственно к this через переопределенные методы. Можно, конечно переопределеить все методы (и открытые) в RestrictionCollectorTest. Но не слишком ли это дорогая цена за несколько френдов у RestrictionCollector?

Excuse me, I didn't get it, why do we need Inst()? You may create a helper method in RestrictionCollectorTest, named AddFeatureId. Or, you may make m_restrictionCollector protected, and access it directly.

Действительно,
(1) я могу добавить зактрытые методы RestrictionCollector в RestrictionCollectorTest. Тогда тест сохранит наглядность и мы избавимся растущего набора в friend-ов в RestrictionCollector, оставим там только friend RestrictionCollectorTest. Цена: повторение интефейса RestrictionCollectorTest в RestrictionCollector. Т.е. надо добавить в RestrictionCollectorTest не только AddFeatureId, но и закрытые ComposeRestrictions(), RemoveInvalidRestrictions(), ParseFeatureId2OsmIdsMapping() и т.д.

(2) можно оставить как есть сейчас. Цена: постоянно растущий список friends.

Вариант с protected m_restrictionCollector не подходит, поскольку я должен буду в классе наследнике от RestrictionCollectorTest обращаться к private методам RestrictionCollector. А класс наследник RestrictionCollectorTest не является другом RestrictionCollector.

Думаешь вариант (1) будет лучше?

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:15:10Z

generator/osm_source.hpp

@@ -48,6 +51,17 @@ class EmitterBase
  virtual void GetNames(vector<string> & names) const = 0;
 };

+class SyncOfstream


Please, move this out to the separate class.

SyncOfstream is not a nested class. Do you suggest to move it a separate file? At first let's decide if we need SyncOfstream at all. Have a look please as Polygonizer. There's a method in it:

void operator () (FeatureBuilder1 & fb, SyncOfstream & featureId2osmIds) { buffer_vector<borders::CountryPolygons const *, 32> vec; m_countries.ForEachInRect(fb.GetLimitRect(), InsertCountriesPtr(vec)); switch (vec.size()) { case 0: break; case 1: EmitFeature(vec[0], fb, featureId2osmIds); break; default: { #if PARALLEL_POLYGONIZER m_ThreadPoolSemaphore.acquire(); m_ThreadPool.start(new PolygonizerTask(this, vec, fb, featureId2osmIds)); #else PolygonizerTask task(this, vec, fb, featureId2osmIds); task.RunBase(); #endif } } }

As far as I see in case 2 PolygonizerTask(s) could be executed in a separate thread. So EmitFeature could be called from different threads. To be on the save side I decided to use mutex (SyncOfstream). Do you think EmitFeature() couldn't be called from different threads?

Yep, seems that PARALLEL_POLYGONIZER is set here. But in any case, you may just collect pass to EmitFeature some kind of holder instead of sync ofstream, i.e. map from feature id to a vector of osm ids. And, at the end, just dump one or two maps to the file. No need in SyncOfstream.

Ah, no. It seems that things are more complex. OK, need to think about this.

@syershov Could you please comment it? As far as I remember you're well aware of this part of code.

Please, move this out to the separate class.

I moved SyncOfstream to a separate hpp/cpp.

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:15:38Z

generator/osm_source.cpp

@@ -524,6 +532,30 @@ class MainFeaturesEmitter : public EmitterBase
 };
 }  // anonymous namespace

+void SyncOfstream::Open(string const & fullPath)
+{
+  lock_guard<mutex> gard(m_mutex);


s/gard/guard/g

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:17:58Z

generator/feature_generator.hpp

@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@ class FeaturesCollector

  string const & GetFilePath() const { return m_datFile.GetName(); }

+  uint32_t GetNextFeatureId() const { return m_featureID; }


Please, get rid of this method. Modify operator() to return feature id instead.

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:18:56Z

generator/osm_source.cpp

+    return;
+
+  lock_guard<mutex> gard(m_mutex);
+  m_stream << featureId << ", ";


Are you sure that ASCII is good here? Why not to binary-encode?

At least at development stage I'd prefer to leave it as ASCII text files. They are not very large (up to 10K lines) and it's convenient to have them as text for debugging restrictions. Then we can change serializing/deserializing to binary encoding.

Besides that, it's easier to write tests if we use ASCII.

The third advantage of keeping the mapping in text files is the mapping from feature id to osm ids could be useful for other parts of our system. (@mgsergio has mentioned that it could be useful for him.)

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:19:19Z

generator/osm_source.cpp

+  lock_guard<mutex> gard(m_mutex);
+  m_stream << featureId << ", ";
+  for (osm::Id const & osmId : osmIds)
+    m_stream << osmId.OsmId() << ", ";


Is it a good idea to write "," at the end of the line?

I did it to make code easier. Anyway deserializer is ready if there's no comma at the end of line (ParseLineOfNumbers). Do you think it'll be better to add some lines of code and stop writing commas at the end?

So what? A list of items separated by commas is more natural than list of items with trailing comma.

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:20:04Z

generator/osm_source.cpp

@@ -524,6 +532,30 @@ class MainFeaturesEmitter : public EmitterBase
 };
 }  // anonymous namespace

+void SyncOfstream::Open(string const & fullPath)


Could you please explain why do we need this class at all?

Please see my detailed explanation and questions above, near your comment "Please, move this out to the separate class."

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:21:49Z

generator/restrictions.cpp

+
+namespace
+{
+string const kNoStr = "No";


s/kNoStr/kNo/g
s/kOnlyStr/kOnly/g

BTW, char[] is almost the same but cheaper.

Ok. Let's do it as char[].

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:23:44Z

generator/restrictions.hpp

+  {
+    Restriction(Type type, size_t linkNumber);
+    // Constructor for testing.
+    Restriction(Type type, vector<FeatureId> const & links);


If it's for testing, create a static method like "MakeForTesting".

Now the situation is changed. The construction is used for initializing Restriction after Deserializtion. The comment was removed.

ygorshenin · 2016-10-31T12:23:58Z

generator/restrictions.hpp

+  /// \brief Addresses a link in vector<Restriction>.
+  struct Index
+  {
+    size_t m_restrictionNumber; // Restriction number in restriction vector.


Default initialization, please.

Done. Constructor with two params is enough.

Index(size_t restrictionNumber, size_t linkNumber) : m_restrictionNumber(restrictionNumber), m_linkNumber(linkNumber) {}

bykoianko · 2016-11-03T10:13:49Z

Обсудили голосом и пришли к следующему. Надо делать в два независимых приёма

Сделал, как договаривались. См. детальный ответ в описании PR.

bykoianko · 2016-11-03T10:19:02Z

@ygorshenin @mpimenov @syershov @Zverik @dobriy-eeh PTAL
DUDE JTTP

bykoianko · 2016-11-03T15:02:31Z

DUDE JTTP

bykoianko · 2016-11-10T16:00:36Z

Отребейзил на свежий мастер.
DUDE JTTP
@ygorshenin @mpimenov @syershov PTAL

ygorshenin · 2016-11-11T09:42:48Z

generator/generator_tests/restriction_test.cpp

+  string const writableDir = platform.WritableDir();
+
+  // Building empty mwm.
+  LocalCountryFile country(my::JoinFoldersToPath(writableDir, kTestDir), CountryFile(kTestMwm), 1);


We have LocalCountryFile::MakeForTesting() for that.

It doesn't work in this case because |kTestMwm| are placed in writableDir/kTestDir but not in writableDir.

ygorshenin · 2016-11-11T09:45:57Z

generator/restriction_collector.cpp

+  if (!ParseFeatureId2OsmIdsMapping(featureIdToOsmIdsPath)
+      || !ParseRestrictions(restrictionPath))
+  {
+    LOG(LWARNING, ("An error happened while parsing", featureIdToOsmIdsPath, "or", restrictionPath));


This message is not very informative. I suggest you to replace it by more specific error messages in corresponding Parse...() functions.

ygorshenin · 2016-11-11T09:48:06Z

generator/restriction_collector.cpp

+      return false;
+
+    if (osmIds.size() < 2)
+      return false;  // Every line should contain feature id and at least one osm id.


Same as above - an error message would be helpful.

ygorshenin · 2016-11-11T09:49:26Z

routing/restriction_loader.cpp

+
+  try
+  {
+    m_reader = make_unique<FilesContainerR::TReader>(mwmValue.m_cont.GetReader(ROUTING_FILE_TAG));


You use only mwmValue.m_cont. So, I suggest you to get rid of mwmValue and pass FileContainerR instead.

I use mwmValue directly in initialization list:

RestrictionLoader::RestrictionLoader(MwmValue const & mwmValue) : m_countryFileName(mwmValue.GetCountryFileName())

ygorshenin · 2016-11-11T09:51:36Z

routing/routing_serializer.hpp

+      CHECK(restriction.IsValid(), ());
+      CHECK_LESS(1, restriction.m_featureIds.size(), ("No sense in zero or one link restrictions."));
+
+      BitWriter<FileWriter> bits(sink);


BTW, why do you need to re-create bits on each iteration? Why not to create it once, before the loop?

Oh! Thanks. The same the BitReader bits(src); Fixed!

bykoianko · 2016-11-11T12:17:25Z

DUDE JTTP
@ygorshenin @mpimenov @syershov PTAL

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:48:20Z

generator/restriction_collector.cpp

+RestrictionCollector::RestrictionCollector(string const & restrictionPath,
+                                           string const & featureIdToOsmIdsPath)
+{
+  auto const restrictionCleaner = [this](){


s/restrictionCleaner/clean/ ?

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:49:14Z

generator/restriction_collector.cpp

+
+bool RestrictionCollector::ParseFeatureId2OsmIdsMapping(string const & featureIdToOsmIdsPath)
+{
+  ifstream featureId2OsmIdsStream(featureIdToOsmIdsPath);


ygorshenin · 2016-11-11T12:50:42Z

LGTM

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:50:52Z

generator/restriction_collector.cpp

+    if (!ParseLineOfNumbers(iter, osmIds))
+    {
+      LOG(LWARNING, ("Cannot parse feature id to osm ids mapping from file:",
+                     featureIdToOsmIdsPath, ". line:", line));


Обычно нотация file+line означает, что будет написано имя файла и номер строки, а не содержимое.

Да, я понимаю. Но у мне не так просто получить номер строки здесь. Теперь имя файла переехало выше (в вызывающий метод). Так что теперь это выглядит иначе.

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:52:52Z

generator/restriction_collector.cpp

+void RestrictionCollector::AddFeatureId(uint32_t featureId, vector<uint64_t> const & osmIds)
+{
+  // Note. One |featureId| could correspond to several osm ids.
+  // but for road feature |featureId| corresponds exactly one osm id.


s/but/But/
s/corresponds/corresponds to/

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:55:02Z

generator/restriction_collector.hpp

@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+#pragma once
+
+#include "routing/routing_serializer.hpp"


Please change the file name if it is not too hard. Compare with existing:
base/std_serialization.hpp
indexer/geometry_serialization.hpp

Let's rename the two files for uniformity

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:56:32Z

generator/restriction_writer.cpp

+  // Extracting type of restriction.
+  auto const tagIt = relationElement.tags.find("restriction");
+  if (tagIt == relationElement.tags.end())
+    return;  // Type of the element is different from "restriction".


Лиший комментарий.

Да. Удалил.

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:56:50Z

generator/restriction_writer.cpp

+
+  Restriction::Type type = Restriction::Type::No;
+  if (!TagToType(tagIt->second, type))
+    return;  // Unsupported restriction type.


Лишний комментарий.

Это полезный, думаю. В osm добавляется большое кол-во вариантов мусорных типов restrictions. Если мы в этой строчке, то значит обрабатываем restriction не документированного типа.

Удалил

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T12:58:23Z

generator/restriction_writer.cpp

+    return;  // Unsupported restriction type.
+
+  // Adding restriction.
+  m_stream << ToString(type) << "," << fromIt->first << ", " << toIt->first << endl;


Consider using '\n': recall that endl flushes the stream.

Right. Let's save some times while saving.

bykoianko · 2016-11-11T13:16:58Z

DUDE JTTP
@mpimenov @syershov PTAL

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T14:18:59Z

routing/routing_serializer.hpp

+      uint32_t const biasedFirstFeatureId = coding::DeltaCoder::Decode(bits);
+      if (biasedFirstFeatureId == 0)
+      {
+        LOG(LERROR, ("Decoded first link restriction feature id delta is zero.."));


Лишняя точка.

Готово

mpimenov · 2016-11-11T14:30:04Z

LGTM

bykoianko · 2016-11-11T15:25:45Z

DUDE JTTP

syershov · 2016-11-11T15:29:54Z

LGTM

bykoianko · 2016-11-11T15:32:00Z

Всем спасибо за ревью!

dobriy-eeh reviewed Oct 27, 2016

View reviewed changes

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch from 8cda6d0 to 4427652 Compare October 27, 2016 14:35

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch from 89eb291 to f0fcaab Compare October 28, 2016 08:03

syershov suggested changes Oct 28, 2016

View reviewed changes

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch from f0fcaab to 513a9ff Compare October 28, 2016 11:54

syershov suggested changes Oct 28, 2016

View reviewed changes

mpimenov reviewed Oct 28, 2016

View reviewed changes

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch 2 times, most recently from 7e9a07c to aee1508 Compare October 31, 2016 11:58

ygorshenin reviewed Oct 31, 2016

View reviewed changes

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch 2 times, most recently from e7d8b29 to d825090 Compare November 3, 2016 10:12

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch from 2b3e568 to 8931c6a Compare November 7, 2016 08:25

ygorshenin reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

mpimenov reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

bykoianko added 2 commits November 11, 2016 16:15

Review fixes.

1363334

Moving routing_serializer and restriction_loader to routing submodule.

2c18b35

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch from 3b56e90 to 6615363 Compare November 11, 2016 13:16

mpimenov reviewed Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

Review fixes.

527000b

bykoianko force-pushed the master-adding-relation-restriction-to-mwm branch from 6615363 to 527000b Compare November 11, 2016 14:28

Review fixes.

2c0d8ce

syershov approved these changes Nov 11, 2016

View reviewed changes

dobriy-eeh merged commit ac83492 into mapsme:master Nov 11, 2016

		@@ -40,6 +40,8 @@ class FeaturesCollector

		string const & GetFilePath() const { return m_datFile.GetName(); }

		uint32_t GetNextFeatureId() const { return m_featureID; }

		@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
		#pragma once

		#include "routing/routing_serializer.hpp"

Collect road restrictions in feature id term on generation step. #4567

Collect road restrictions in feature id term on generation step. #4567

Conversation

bykoianko commented Oct 27, 2016 • edited Loading

mapsmetest commented Oct 27, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bykoianko commented Oct 27, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dobriy-eeh commented Oct 28, 2016

bykoianko commented Oct 28, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mpimenov commented Oct 28, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bykoianko Nov 3, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bykoianko Nov 3, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bykoianko Nov 3, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bykoianko commented Oct 27, 2016 •

edited

Loading

mpimenov commented Oct 28, 2016 •

edited

Loading

bykoianko Nov 3, 2016 •

edited

Loading

bykoianko Nov 3, 2016 •

edited

Loading

bykoianko Nov 3, 2016 •

edited

Loading