Is there a reason we shouldn't include the c++ bindings? Especially if they have done all the export work for building shared libraries on Windows? I have had plugin developers wanting to use the C++ api for hdf5/netcdf is why I ask.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:11 PM, David Thompson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dcthomp@sandia.gov">dcthomp@sandia.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
After ranting on a bit yesterday, I had another go at the install rules and found that removing all the complicated if stuff I put in makes it simpler and it errr still works. So that's nice.<br>
<br>
Question.<br>
<br>
Assuming I go ahead with it ...Do I put the entire hdf distribution under utilites - or just the bits that we need for paraview support? (ie skip most tools/examples/cpp bindings/fortran etc etc).<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br></div>
The netcdf included with VTK is just the library and not any of the tools. However, I think it's a good idea to provide h5dump (and ncdump for that matter) since they are good ways to debug problems. Certainly, I wouldn't include C++/FORTRAN bindings or examples.<br>
<br>
Just my 2 cents,<br><font color="#888888">
David</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Paraview-developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Paraview-developers@paraview.org" target="_blank">Paraview-developers@paraview.org</a><br>
<a href="http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview-developers" target="_blank">http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview-developers</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>