[Insight-users] Upgrading software from ITK 3.2 to ITK 4.4

[Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin]

Hi Harri,

In case you didn't see it, you should consider reading the migration guide.

See http://itk.org/migrationv4/

Hth
Jc




On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Harri Pölönen <hapapo at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hi all!
>
> We have a pretty big medical software which is originally created using
> ITK 3.20. Now we are interested in upgrading it to use the newest ITK
> version. We mainly use functions related to 3D volume processing (affine
> transformation etc) and data input/output. There are some new nice features
> in ITK4 that we want to use, such as MRI bias correction.
>
> I already tried simply replacing the old ITK with the current one (4.4.2)
> and rebuilding everything from the source codes, but that didn't work (not
> that I even expected it to work this way). There seem to be some now
> obsolete functions/methods in ITK 3.2 and other issues I just need go
> through and fix one by one manually.
>
> However, before I start editing our software I would be grateful to hear
> any advice and other experiences about similar job. Our software contains
> about 400 C++ files and 200 000+ lines of code (not including ITK code), so
> there will be a lot of work to do with this upgrade. Specifically I would
> like to hear comments on the following questions:
>
>  x How much work is expected? I mean, are there many functions/methods in
> ITK 3.2 that do not exist anymore in the modern ITK releases or are called
> in a different way? Would it be possible to perform the upgrade in just a
> few days or should I book several weeks for the job (obviously this depends
> heavily on how our software is built internally)?
>
>  x What are the main known differences between those ITK versions that I
> should be aware of? Where will I face the biggest problems?
>
>  x Are there any functions that are protected by patents in ITK 4 but are
> free-for-all in ITK 3.2? Our software is commercial, so we don't and won't
> use any patented components.
>
> I know there's a backward compatibility option in building ITK 4 but we
> don't really want to use it. We prefer to rewrite our code to work directly
> with ITK 4 instead.
>
> Thanks!
>
> / Harri
>
>
> _____________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
> http://www.kitware.com/products/protraining.php
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
>
>


-- 
+1 919 869 8849
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.itk.org/pipermail/insight-users/attachments/20131115/7462d16b/attachment.htm>