[Insight-users] Re: rigid registration: PointSet to PointSet registration

[Luis Ibanez]

Hi Imho,

In the ealy times of the Toolkit we used to have
a registration framework that was heavily based
on Generic Programming principles. At that time
both ImageToImage and PointSetToImage registration
methods were implemented.

However, the world wasn't ready for that many template
parameters, so we 'detemplated' the framework in order
to do a more traditional polymorphic system. During the
conversion we gave priority to the ImageToImage
registration methods and put the PointSetToImage in  the
low priority list.

The refactoring of the Procrustes registration went
also to the  low priority list.

Since then, the low priority list simply keeps growing
and we haven't been able to take this items out of the
stack.

We still plan to re-factor the PointSetToImage methods,
it is just a matter of finding the time for doing so...


HINT: If enough users (kindly) complain about the lack
       of a feature in the toolkit, this rapidly pumps up
       items in the priority list....   :-)



Regards,



    Luis


--------------
imho wrote:
> Hi Luis,
> 
> you said that you work on the implementation of point-based 
> registration, but is this a SetPoint to Image or SetPoint to SetPoint 
> registration?
> On the beta 0.9, it was a Procrusts Registration, why is it gone ?
> 
> Thanks
> 
>