[Paraview-developers] [vtk-developers] vtkStreamingDemandDrivenPipeline::EXTENT_TRANSLATOR

[Berk Geveci]

I have no objection whatsoever to changing it to be a subclass
of vtkInformationObjectBaseKey and renaming it as such. It should work but
please run the ensemble source test to make sure.

-berk


On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Biddiscombe, John A. <biddisco at cscs.ch>
wrote:

>  Berk
>
>
>
> Thanks once more for the info.
>
>
>
> Question :
>
>
>
> The class I want to pass downstream is a vtkObject and not a
> vtkDataObject, so ..
>
>
>
> There are
>
> informationDataObject and InformationDataObjectMetaData keys, but there
> are not
>
> informationObject and InformationObjectMetaData keys,
>
>
>
> but since DataObject is a type of Object, would anything be adversely
> affected if I were to change them to
>
> InformationObject->InformationObjectMetaData
>
>
>
> and provide a GetObject and GetDataObject interface to return the type
> contained? Adding two new classes seems wasteful when they actually do the
> same thing internally.
>
>
>
> Do the informationDataObject and metadata key classes need to specialized
> as different from Object and ObjectMetaData? (other than just for naming
> purposes)
>
>
>
> ta
>
>
>
> JB
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/paraview-developers/attachments/20140828/a36de62c/attachment-0001.html>