[Insight-developers] Musings on new modularization

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Johnson, Hans J <hans-johnson at uiowa.edu> wrote:
>> First: I understand that modularization will eventually have benefits, and I
>> am not opposed to it.  I loved my old comfortable ITK, and this new version
>> is certainly going to take some time to get used to.
>> I do have a few observations that may/may not be addressable:
>> 1)  Bad.  The path to code has a repeated name "src/ITK/ITK/Core/Common"
>>  Note the ITK/ITK.  This makes it difficult to comminicate with other
>> developers verbally when trying to work through problems.  "Goto the upper
>> level ITK directory" "Goto the nested ITK directory below the ITK
>> directory".   Perhaps this directory could be renamed back to Code, or some
>> other unique name.  This should be done quickly before the developers
>> fingers learn this pattern.  This is also annoying, because my shell prompt
>> shows me the directory name that I am currently in, and with replicated
>> naming scheme my current working directory displayed is now ambiguous.
>> 1a)  There is "ITK/Utilities" and there is "ITK/ITK/Utilities" .  These
>> should also be made unique.  Perhaps "ITK/BuildUtilities"
>
> I agree 100%. ITK/ITK is cumbersome. Will VTK be using VTK/VTK/
>
There are no plans to do that in VTK.
>
>> 2) Unfortunate, but probably necessary.   Using grep to find items has
>> become more tedious with the new "bush" structure, where the previous "tree"
>> had fewer places to look. Not bad, and it is probably more annoying for
>> those of us who have the ITK tree navigation imprinted as involuntary
>> reflexes rather than conscious thought.   After re-trainging the new
>> structure will likely make it easier to find items.
>
> Agree, unfortunate but necessary.

I love git grep.

Marcus