[Insight-developers] USE_FFTWF and USE_FFTWD and Exlicit Instantiation

[Kent Williams]

You can do this, but you need to check to make sure the build works even 
if FFTW is not configured in, and if only the double or single precision 
versions of the FFTW libraries are built.

Would it work to move the implementation of the proxy classes to 
separate CXX files, that are included or excluded by CMake?  The main 
reason for the ifdefs is to not include calls to function libraries that 
don't exist in the current configuration.

I'm sorry this has been a thorn in your side. It wouldn't be a problem 
if FFTW wasn't set up in such a crazy fashion.

Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I have tried to wrap those classes, and I'm still stopped by the #if  
> defined(...) blocks.
> Is it a problem for someone if I remove them ? I really can't 
> understand  how they can help the user to not make some mistake.
>
> thanks,
>
> Gaetan
>
>
> Le Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:29:56 +0200, Kent Williams  
> <kent at psychiatry.uiowa.edu> a écrit:
>
>> I spent some time this morning looking at the itkFFTDirectInverse2 
>> test  and frankly I was baffled.
>>
>> This test makes a new file by going from image->fft->ifft->image, 
>> and  then comparing the input image with the output image.  I looked 
>> at both  images in the Gimp, and they appear to be exactly the same 
>> -- pixel 0,0  == 255, everything else 0.  But the test fixture main() 
>> (in  itkTestMain.h) compares the two files, and says they're 
>> different. I  don't know who to believe -- the test fixture or my 
>> lying eyes?
>>
>> Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It doesn't segfault anymore :-)
>>> http://www.itk.org/Testing/Sites/marvin.jouy.inra.fr/Mandriva2006.0-i586-gcc4.0.1-ExplicitInstantiation-Debug/20060823-1723-Experimental/Test.html  
>>> There is still a problem with one test, but I'm not sure that's 
>>> related  to  your changes. It's surely better to wait for the tests 
>>> of the  other  testing hosts.
>>>
>>> I will look at wrapping those modified classes now. It should be 
>>> much  easy  :-)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Gaetan
>>>
>>> Le Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:35:28 +0200, Kent Williams   
>>> <kent at psychiatry.uiowa.edu> a écrit:
>>>
>>>> I discovered and corrected this error. Thanks for pointing it out! 
>>>> I   didn't set the first element of the index for the output image 
>>>> region;  I  don't know why this didn't break tests before, other 
>>>> than the  usual:  happenstance in memory layout, dumb luck, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Gaetan Lehmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:15:29 +0200, Kent Williams    
>>>>> <kent at psychiatry.uiowa.edu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry about this problem -- It passed local regression tests, 
>>>>>> but  we   don't build the double-precision FFTW by default, so I 
>>>>>> missed  the   problems in the double precision version of the 
>>>>>> proxy class.  Thanks  for  fixing it Luis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only way I know of to always test this code is to always 
>>>>>> build   both  single and double precision FFTW libraries on the 
>>>>>> testing   machines.   This isn't a big deal, since FFTW changes 
>>>>>> only once in  a  great while.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Kent,
>>>>>
>>>>> That's nice to have it build, but there is still lots of problems  
>>>>> with   those filters. I tried to trace the errors, but fixing them 
>>>>> is  not in  my  capabilities :-(
>>>>> Can you have a look at them ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gaetan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [glehmann at marvin build-debug]$ ctest -R FFT
>>>>> Start processing tests
>>>>> Test project
>>>>> 719/1092 Testing itkVnlFFTTest                    Passed
>>>>> 720/1092 Testing itkFFTWF_FFTTest              ***Exception: SegFault
>>>>> 721/1092 Testing itkFFTWD_FFTTest              ***Exception: SegFault
>>>>> 996/1092 Testing FFTImageFilterTest               Passed
>>>>> 997/1092 Testing FFTDirectInverse2Test         ***Failed
>>>>> 998/1092 Testing FFTImageFilterTest2              Passed
>>>>> 999/1092 Testing FFTImageFilterTest3              Passed
>>>>>
>>>>> 57% tests passed, 3 tests failed out of 7
>>>>>
>>>>> The following tests FAILED:
>>>>>         720 - itkFFTWF_FFTTest (SEGFAULT)
>>>>>         721 - itkFFTWD_FFTTest (SEGFAULT)
>>>>>         997 - FFTDirectInverse2Test (Failed)
>>>>> Errors while running CTest
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>