[Insight-developers] Proposal: Adding ImageCheck class to Insight/Testing/Code/Common

[Stephen Aylward]

I think the idea might be a good one, but the formatting of the code on that
wiki page is so irregular that I cannot see past those problems to figure
out what it actually does...

s

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Bradley Lowekamp
<blowekamp at mail.nih.gov>wrote:

> I added this to the wiki as another example of what could be done.
>
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/Proposals:Increasing_ITK_Code_Coverage#Custom_CTest_CMake_CDash_Integration
>
> The strengths of this approach is that it separates the execution and the
> validation (or is it verification) making the test code it's self smaller.
> It easily integrates with the CDash/CMake infrastructure (as it was designed
> to). Many existing test which print text could easily be migrated to this
> approach so that the output of the program is also validated and we will
> know when it changes. It could easily be expanded to compare new types. A
> single executable could be run with multiple arguments for multiple test and
> each test could have a different baseline. On the down sides this may
> require the most work to get working.
>
> Any feedback or comments are welcome :)
> Brad
>
> On Feb 13, 2009, at 7:28 AM, Lowekamp, Bradley (NIH/NLM/LHC) [C] wrote:
>
> I am going to work on adding one more suggestion to that page based on
> some work I did for an internal project. It was based on Dart XML. The
> output of test programs were XML, tag for ints, double, and blocks of
> text. This was then compared against a baseline XML, which contained
> XML tag arguments for defining how to compare things. We may even be
> able able to override the output streams in many cases to produce XML.
> This is important because it would make porting the old test easy, and
> we get the added benefit of verifying the output of the test with type
> specific information.
>
> More to come one the wiki, after I dig this stuff up.
>
> Brad
>
> On Feb 13, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:
>
>
> I was thinking no decision was made on that subject - I must have
>
> missed something :-)
>
>
>
> Le 12 févr. 09 à 23:27, Luis Ibanez a écrit :
>
>
>
> Hi Gaetan,
>
>
> My recollection from our previous discussions on other
>
> testing frameworks, is that they were too heavy to be
>
> made part of ITK, and that they will overlap anyways
>
> with existing functionalities of CMake and CTests.
>
>
> Adding support classes for Testing to ITK, and adding
>
> CMake support macros seems to be a more effective way
>
> of improving the testing framework.
>
>
> The classes that we are proposing here will fill up
>
> that void of tools for domain-specific testing.
>
>
> That being said,
>
> This is just my recollection of the previous discussion.
>
>
> I'm probably missing many factor here....
>
>
>
> Luis
>
>
>
> --------------------
>
> Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Luis Ibanez  <luis.ibanez at kitware.com
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, indeed,
>
> this suggested class will be one of many to come in a larger
>
> testing framework. You could imagine similar classes for
>
> ImageRegions, Indices, Points, Transforms....
>
>
> Gaëtan Lehmann wrote:
>
>
> However, wouldn't it be better to add this kind of check in a
>
> larger  test framework, as discussed some weeks ago?
>
>
>
> My mail was not clear.
>
> I wanted to talk about the unit test frameworks we discussed some
>
> time  ago, like the one listed here:
>
> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/Proposals:Increasing_ITK_Code_Coverage
>
> We need this kind of thing for numerical tests for example, so I
>
> think  it would be nice to be consistent for the new check specific
>
> to ITK.
>
> Gaëtan
>
>
> --
>
> Gaëtan Lehmann
>
> Biologie du Développement et de la Reproduction
>
> INRA de Jouy-en-Josas (France)
>
> tel: +33 1 34 65 29 66    fax: 01 34 65 29 09
>
> http://voxel.jouy.inra.fr  http://www.mandriva.org
>
> http://www.itk.org  http://www.clavier-dvorak.org
>
>
> <PGP.sig><ATT00001.txt>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.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
>
>


-- 
Stephen R. Aylward, Ph.D.
Chief Medical Scientist
Kitware, Inc. - North Carolina Office
http://www.kitware.com
(518) 371-3971 x300
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.itk.org/mailman/private/insight-developers/attachments/20090215/abf8fa63/attachment.htm>