[Dgtal-devel] Feedbacks

Jacques-Olivier.Lachaud at univ-savoie.fr Jacques-Olivier.Lachaud at univ-savoie.fr
Thu Jun 6 17:55:24 CEST 2013


Hi !

> Hi all,
>
> This mailing list was not really active these months but you may  
> have followed a lot of  cool features coming into DGtal's GitHub site.
>
> At this point, I would like to have your opinion on couple of  
> statements/questions about quite important changes in DGtal "user  
> experience" (yeah I know.. that's just a buzz word).
>
>
> 1) By default, we disable the build of unit test programs
>
>      Why: to speedup and make first build easier for beginners
>      The dev. or interested user may run a specific "cmake ..  
> -DBUILD_TESTING=ON" to activate the build
>
>      Examples would still be built by default.
>
>      Travis would still compile the whole project

Good idea. This is also consistent with point 2) where you wish to  
simplify the installation.

>
>
> 2) Go to a header (.h/.ih) only source code
>
>      Why: most of the code is H/IH. Furthermore, it would allows  
> external projects build upon DGtal to choose the dependencies at  
> compile/link time.

I agree that at the moment libDGtal et libDGtalIO are rather useless.  
The only advantage of .cpp is compile time (since things are compiled  
once), but in fact, 99% of the compile time is because of templates.

I just wonder about examples, which were a cool feature. We keep the  
same process as before ?

>
>     At this point, external projects (such as DGtalTools) can only  
> use optional features (e.g. QGLViewer for Viewer3D) only if they  
> have been set at DGtal build.
>
>      + easier to manage for Windows or other distrib
>      + User can manage easily the dependencies
>      + cmake FIND_PACKAGE would look like;
>
>            FIND_PACKAGE(DGtal COMPONENTS  GMP QGLViewer     ...)
>
>  	as in ITK or CGAL for instance. The FIND components would thus try  
> to "locate" the deps and prepare the link flags
>
>      - we would increase a bit the complete build time  
> (DGtal+tests+examples). But if we follow question 1, the "user"  
> wouldn't be impacted.
>
>
> 3) Focus on QGLViewer for Viewer3D (and move OpenInventer or OGRE to  
> external extensions)
>
>     Why: hard to maintain several viewers in //, even if cooler  
> features may exist in other viewers (interactivity, ..)
>
>     We've started to discuss about that with Bertrand and Jaco  
> 	https://github.com/DGtal-team/DGtal/issues/638

We need perhaps more feedback on the OGRE viewer, but I agree for  
OpenInventor/Coin.
Jaco
>
>
> regards
> dav
>
> ----------------
> David Coeurjolly - Directeur de recherche CNRS
> CNRS, LIRIS-UMR 5205
> Université de Lyon
> Batiment Nautibus
> 43 boulevard du 11 novembre 1918, 69622 Villeurbanne cedex, France
> Tel : (+33) [0]4.72.44.82.40  Fax : (+33) [0]4.72.43.15.36
> http://liris.cnrs.fr/david.coeurjolly
>
>
>
>
>




More information about the Dgtal-devel mailing list