[Insight-developers] using swig to wrap ITK - a summary of the tcon (and a little much)

[Bill Hoffman]

Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:
>
> and - please - no more tell me what I'm doing is not constructive
>
> BTW, I'm not making attacks against CVS. CVS is a good tool, but there 
> are some very better versioning systems. I'll not describe why - it's 
> very easy to find with google
Yes, and we are all aware of CVS's short falls, but it has nothing to do 
with wrapping and ITK.
So, lets keep this on topic.   The topic at hand is improving the 
wrapping process.   And, yes,
you have done great things towards that goal.   I would like to see you 
make it across the finish
line and get this working in ITK on all the platforms and languages that 
the old wrappers worked
with. 

So, to answer your question one module per class would be too many .so 
files.   If you look at VTK,
there are 1000 classes.  That would be 1000 .so files or dlls, I am not 
sure what problems that would cause but
for one thing just looking at a directory with a 1000 files can be 
slow.   Swig has the idea that whole
libraries should NOT be wrapped.   The Swig way is to  create a smaller 
API that is wrapped.  Perhaps a
hand created API.   We want an entire class library wrapped.   This 
changes the design requirements a bit.

So, I  guess this means you are not interested in doing the smaller 
example and feasibility study I am interested in.
You seem to have not addressed that issue in this email.   Perhaps you 
could use your pygccxml based system
to create the .i files for the test to avoid doing much by hand.   The 
.i files should not have much
python specific stuff in them.   I really don't see the point in moving 
forward until we are 100% sure it is going
to work.  ( I am right now about 95% sure....)   If you are interested, 
I can create the library of sample classes
to wrap.

-Bill