[ITK-users] [ITK-dev] [ANN] ITK 4.9 Release Candidate 1 is ready for testing!

[Simon Alexander]

Oh, and I'm not sure how I managed to get gerrit to separate them, but I'll
have a look at the aliases and figure that out.

On Tue, 8 Dec 2015 at 16:53 Simon Alexander <skalexander at gmail.com> wrote:

> No problem - only the template expansion one is worrying me about the
> compiler; I'm going to follow that up with the VS team as soon as I can
> generate as simpler example
>
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2015 at 16:45 Dženan Zukić <dzenanz at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Simon for getting to this.
>>
>> All changes look simple enough. You maybe needed to amend previous
>> commits on the same topic to generate just one review.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dženan
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Simon Alexander <skalexander at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've sent a patch set to gerrit, managed to screw it up somehow and
>>> generated 4 reviews instead of 1, whups.  Matt, you're on them not sure who
>>> else should be.
>>>
>>> One of them is just a script modification so that my bash port likes
>>> your utilities script, just a proposal.
>>>
>>> The other three address each error.  Two are a loop fusion issue where
>>> mixed type comparison is being generated incorrectly, changing the bound
>>> type fixes this.
>>>
>>> More concerning: the third change is an expansion issue with
>>> itk::Size<3>  where it doesn't get the bound right for a .Fill call and
>>> never initializes the last element.
>>>
>>> Apologies  for the delay, i'm hesitant to blame things on the compiler
>>> until I've convinced myself I know what is going on.  TODO generate
>>> simplified versions to file with VS team.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 at 13:53 Simon Alexander <skalexander at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Matt,
>>>>
>>>> Quick update:  I've found two compiler bugs so far - not great.   On
>>>> hopefully better news, I've also found that update 1 has shipped.  So I
>>>> will configure that and run it against your RC2 to see if these things are
>>>> resolved.  If not I have workarounds, unsure of the wisdom of adding them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 4 Dec 2015 at 17:34 Matt McCormick <matt.mccormick at kitware.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Simon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apologies I haven't been able to put much time into this, ran into
>>>>>> some interesting challenges with VS2015 itself (at least in my
>>>>>> configuration) hanging permanently when changing from debug to release
>>>>>> mode, or vice versa.  It seems the generated project files are a bit of a
>>>>>> challenge for it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, Visual Studio has difficulty with large projects that have many
>>>>> build targets. With the 4.9 release, we addressed the behavior a bit by
>>>>> reducing the number of header tests and by turning BUILD_EXAMPLES OFF by
>>>>> default.
>>>>>
>>>>> By setting ITK_BUILD_DEFAULT_MODULES to OFF, responsiveness can be
>>>>> improved when focusing on development of a subset of modules.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> At any rate, I have narrowed down part of the issue at least to being
>>>>>> not in the interpolate filter itself, but rather in the test driver code
>>>>>> ... somewhere in the nested loops incrementing the underlying array
>>>>>> elements is behaving incorrectly in release mode.  I'll try and have  a
>>>>>> closer look this weekend.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Thanks for taking a look at this!
>>>>>
>>>>> In the past, we ran into some issues with Visual Studio in Release
>>>>> mode where adding const or using a reference for the returned type avoided
>>>>> a faulty optimization. Bug reports to upstream Visual Studio have also
>>>>> helped resolve the issue in some cases, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/insight-users/attachments/20151208/18fc8875/attachment.html>