[Insight-users] Re: ITK Wrappers and gcc_xml

[Charl P. Botha]

On 2/16/06, Brad King <brad.king at kitware.com> wrote:
> Charl P. Botha wrote:
> > Does this mean that you'll be able to adapt CableSwig so that it'll be
> > able to handle this situation without human intervention? (i.e.
> > hand-editing CableSwig generated C++ :)
>
> I'm just saying it's technically possible but I have no time to do it
> myself.  Out of curiosity why are you trying to wrap such a low-level
> interface?

Okay, that's a clear answer.

... and a good question.  Actually, I don't need it and neither does
Zach, but Gaetan has indicated that it's handy for for example
hard-coding the number of processes on hyperthreaded CPUs.

I'll probably disable it in my WrapITK checkout.

Zach and Gaetan, should this be configurable in the CMake config? 
Disabling troublesome wrappings (for windows), such as MultiThreader
and ImageBoundaryCondition?

Regards,
Charl