[Insight-developers] Const Missing in inputs for Process Object

[Bill Lorensen]

Derived. This will be a simple concept.


At 04:26 PM 3/23/02 -0500, Will Schroeder wrote:
>How are the in-place filters going to be implemented: as a derived family of filters, or as a per-algorithm choice?
>Will
>
>At 04:06 PM 3/23/2002 -0500, Bill Lorensen wrote:
>>In place filters are coming shortly... Not sure what the const impact will be,
>>
>>Bill
>>
>>At 11:32 AM 3/23/02 -0500, Will Schroeder wrote:
>>>Hi Luis-
>>>
>>>I think this is the right thing to do, except for maybe in-place filters that we'll add at some point. Good luck, this might be a can of worms.
>>>
>>>Will
>>>
>>>
>>>At 11:23 AM 3/23/2002 -0500, Luis Ibanez wrote:
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>The array of inputs for Process Object is not const-correct.
>>>>
>>>>In principle there is no reason for a filter to modify its input
>>>>so the input should be stored as ConstSmartPointers.
>>>>
>>>>Currently this is done using just SmartPointers.
>>>>
>>>>This constness-defect is propagated through all the Filters
>>>>which  basically means that you cannot pass a const image
>>>>as input to any filter.      :-/
>>>>
>>>>Does anybody see a conflict in making the array of m_Inputs
>>>>in itk::ProcessObject   an array of SmartConstPointers   ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Luis
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Insight-developers mailing list
>>>>Insight-developers@public.kitware.com
>>>>http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Insight-developers mailing list
>>>Insight-developers@public.kitware.com
>>>http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
>
>_______________________________________________
>Insight-developers mailing list
>Insight-developers@public.kitware.com
>http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers