[Insight-developers] ITK 3.18 Plans : Moving Multi-threaded registration classes from Review

[Bradley Lowekamp]

Does this include the new resample class? If so I am aware of an outstanding issue that one user was reporting. I am not sure if it's in the bug tracker though.

This is the use of std::complex<> pixel types with the resampling methods. While the original resampling class was close to working, just needed a robust clamp method, the review resampling class in more complicated due it's instantiation of all the interpolation methods. 

I believe these classes need a closer look at what pixel types it should support.

Brad

On Dec 3, 2009, at 2:23 PM, Hans Johnson wrote:

> Luis,
> 
> I would fully support moving the multi-threaded registration from Review to
> the official release.  I've been extensively testing our applications with
> the Review settings  (BRAINSDemonWarp, BRAINSFit), and bug fixes last year
> in Utah and Boston programmers week have resolved all the issues I had.  It
> has been very stable.
> 
> Hans
> 
> -- 
> Hans J. Johnson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> 200 Hawkins Drive
> T205 BT, The University of Iowa
> Iowa City, IA 52242
> 
> hans-johnson at uiowa.edu
> PHONE: 319 353 8587
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com>
>> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 14:19:27 -0500
>> To: ITK <insight-developers at itk.org>
>> Cc: Stephen Aylward <stephen.aylward at kitware.com>
>> Subject: [Insight-developers] ITK 3.18 Plans : Moving Multi-threaded
>> registration classes from Review
>> 
>> As the release date of ITK 3.18 gets closer,
>> we should start defining what we want to see
>> included in this release.
>> 
>> We have a list of IJ papers that are suggested
>> to be moved into Review for ITK 3.18.
>> 
>> And we probably should try to move some code
>> from Review into final destination directories.
>> 
>> ----
>> 
>> In particular, there is some interest in moving
>> the multi-threaded registration metrics and their
>> auxiliary classes.
>> 
>> Officially, some of the Linux distributions
>> (Fedora and Debian) cannot include the files in
>> Review and Patented due to their unclear
>> licensing status.
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> 
>> 
>> Does anyone have objections to moving these
>> registration classes from Code/Review into
>> Code/Algorithms ?
>> 
>> 
>>    Thanks for any comments,
>> 
>> 
>>              Luis
>> _______________________________________________
>> Powered by www.kitware.com
>> 
>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>> 
>> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
>> http://kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>> 
>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
>> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>> 
>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
> 
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
> 
> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
> http://kitware.com/products/protraining.html
> 
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
> 
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-developers

========================================================
Bradley Lowekamp  
Lockheed Martin Contractor for
Office of High Performance Computing and Communications
National Library of Medicine 
blowekamp at mail.nih.gov


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.itk.org/mailman/private/insight-developers/attachments/20091204/b318f909/attachment.htm>