[Insight-developers] GDCM 2.x [was CMake Flag to make itk::Image behave like itk::OrientedImage]

[Mathieu Malaterre]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Karthik Krishnan
<karthik.krishnan at kitware.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 3:34 AM, Mathieu Malaterre
> <mathieu.malaterre at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 3:40 AM, Karthik Krishnan
>> <karthik.krishnan at kitware.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> 6 options for use/not use of system files...
>>>> ITK_USE_SYSTEM_GDCM:BOOL=OFF
>>>>
>>>
>>> We use ITK_USE_SYSTEM_GDCM in our internal projects. We build ITK so as to
>>> use an external build of GDCM (a more recent version), since it has
>>> significantly improved DICOM handling. I vote for retaining this.
>>
>> What exactly is the policy of those system libraries ? Does the same
>> backward policy apply even on those system libraries ?
>
> If I am not mistaken, I don't think the Backward compatibility policy
> applies to any of the third party software in Insight/Utilities.
>
>> Here is what I am planning to do : add support for the new GDCM 2.x
>> architecture via the use of ITK_USE_SYSTEM_GDCM. A compiler #ifdef
>> will determine the MAJOR version of GDCM and if GDCM 2.x is found, a
>> different implementation will be used,
>
> Out of curiosity, is that more of a pain than upgrading the GDCM in
> ITK to 2.0.x ? If so, I wonder what the developers think about
> upgrading the GDCM in ITK, since DICOM handling is pretty fundamental
> for ITK.

I forgot to mention that by design you'll not be able to compile GDCM
2.x with VS6.x, so AFAIK until ITK drop support for VS6, I cannot
integrate GDCM 2.x in ITK.
I thought that I could give normal(*) people a sneak preview of GDCM
2.x new capabilities.

2cts
-- 
Mathieu
(*) and by normal I mean people using a post 1998 standard C++ compiler