[ITK-users] [ITK] ITK Python Wrapping vs. SimpleITK

[Matt McCormick]

Hi Eric,

ITK no longer requires CableSwig for wrapping.  However, it currently
does not build on Visual Studio newer that 2008. This due to GCCXML
limitations.  We have investigated a GCCXML replacement, but it still
needs work.

SimpleITK is also a good option. It has no dependencies other than ITK.

Hope this helps,
Matt

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Heim, Eric <e.heim at dkfz-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> I’m currently embedding python into a C/C++ application and want to access
> ITK through python.
>
> The ITK python wrapping requires CableSwig to work, but I can’t compile it
> under newer Visual Studio versions.
>
> After looking at the git repository I noticed that the last commit in
> CableSwig was done ~2 years ago.
>
> Some open source projects, like 3DSlicer, are now using SimpleITK in their
> python wrapping.
>
>
>
> What are the future development plans of ITK python wrapping, CableSwig and
> SimpleITK?
>
> Would it be more future-proof to embed SimpleITK into an application than
> ITK?  Are there maybe plans
>
> to fully integrate SimpleITK into ITK, so there is no need for additional
> toolkit dependencies except ITK?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Eric
>
>
> _____________________________________
> 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://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community at itk.org
> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/community
>