[Insight-users] Loading DICOM RTStructs

[Luis Ibanez]

Hi Mark,


1) Please log a bug ("Feature Request") In the MANTIS bug tracker:

          http://public.kitware.com/Bug/my_view_page.php

    To requesting the modification of the ITK installation procedure to
    use a single flat directory instead of the current set of subdirectories.

     I agree with you in that, this will make easier to use ITK from
     external project, even in the cases where they use CMake
     for configuration.

     We don't have headers with duplicate names (as far as I know)
     so name collisions shouldn't be an issue.


2) You may find useful to read the tutorial:

               http://www.itk.org/ITK/help/tutorials.html

     in particular:

     http://www.itk.org/CourseWare/Training/GettingStarted-I.pdf

     It will show you how to create a HelloWorld example from
     scratch.

     The same procedure is explained in the initial chapters of
      the ITK Software Guide

             http://www.itk.org/ItkSoftwareGuide.pdf



3)  I don't see why you would need to include "itkConfigure.h"
     in any program that uses ITK.

     If you have found that to be needed, you may be dealing
     with a larger configuration issue.

     Normally, including headers such as "itkImage.h" should
     do the trick.

     You may find useful to look at the many examples in the
      directory:

                             Insight/Examples/



4)  You may understand better the advantages of using CMake
     when you are confronted with the following scenarios:

        A)    Moving your project from one computer to another,
               (even when they have identical operating systems
                 and build environments).

        B)    Building your project in two (or more) different
                platforms.

         C)   Building projects that have dependencies on
                many third party libraries.


      Of course, you are not forced to use CMake in order to
      take advantage of ITK.



   Regards,


          Luis


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Mark Roden <mmroden at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> Thanks for the help, but I'm still having problems.  Namely, the
> headers continue to be scattered throughout a directory tree rather
> than in one big folder.  I'll just do that by hand, I suppose.  But
> the include directory should be flat.  If there are headers that are
> named the same thing, then they should have different names just to
> avoid collisions in general.
>
> Here's the thing.  You compare ITK to STL, and it's STL that I'm
> thinking of.  There, when I #include <vector>, I don't also have to
> #include <algorithm> until I need an algorithm.  If I #include
> <itkimage.h> then I also need to include itkConfigure.h and then that
> needs vnl_math.h and then... and so forth, and they're all in
> different directories.  I want to be able to include the headers I
> need, but just point to one place to use that header, rather than
> pointing to a nested directory structure.  The structure can remain
> nested on the development side; that's entirely irrelevant to me.  But
> for the sake of ease of use, if it's all in one flat directory, then I
> don't need to learn Yet Another Build Tool (CMake), and can just
> include that directory and be done.
>
> I want to start from a blank slate project, where HelloWorld.cpp and
> HellowWorld.h are just there, and nothing else.  Instead, HelloWorld
> is surrounded by a bunch of other projects, and it's not at all clear
> how to make a new project that's entirely empty.  I don't even see a
> HelloWorld.h, and that weirds me out.  Within this separate project, I
> am now free to Do My Own Thing and impose whatever stylistic
> guidelines I want, anything from source control, unit tests, class
> organization, etc.  I don't like being tied to CMake as a tool because
> I don't see how it's necessary to get the job done, I just see it as a
> convenience for making the library.  Once the library is made, the
> tools to make it should get out of the way and let me do my thing.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>