[vtk-developers] vtk-developers Digest, Vol 158, Issue 21

[Andrew Maclean]

Hi Bill, Elvis,
   Elvis, personally I wouldn't like to see the homogenisation of the
examples by doing what you propose.
The reasons are:
1) One of the advantages of the examples is seeing the different approaches
used by the contributors.
2) It may dissuade contributors by implicitly forcing them to use a
particular approach.
3) One of the really useful things in the example is the different ways VTK
is used.

To me it matters little whether:
auto actor = vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor>::New();
​
vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor> actor =
    vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor>::New();

or whether "ren/renWin" is used instead of "renderer" or "rendererWindow"
in the examples.

Of more importance are explanatory notes in the examples.

Bill, I see you are using vtkNamedColors. This example shows what other
things you can do with this class:
https://lorensen.github.io/VTKExamples/site/Cxx/Visualization/NamedColors/

For example, assign colors by name:
renderer->SetBackground(namedColors->GetColor3d("SteelBlue").GetData
());
Create your own named color (in this case a red with an alpha of 0.5):
namedColors->GetColor("Red", rgba);
rgba[3] = 0.5; namedColors->SetColor("My Red", rgba);

Regards
   Andrew


> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>
> To: Elvis Stansvik <elvis.stansvik at orexplore.com>
> Cc: vtkdev <vtk-developers at vtk.org>
> Bcc:
> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 13:32:55 -0400
> Subject: Re: [vtk-developers] vtkNew in examples (or auto?)
> Let's leave them as is for now. I want to make sure I understand this.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Elvis Stansvik
> <elvis.stansvik at orexplore.com> wrote:
> > 2017-06-22 19:09 GMT+02:00 Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>:
> >> I'm not sure what you mean by auto-fying
> >
> > Sorry, I should have been clearer. What I mean is changing declarations
> such as
> >
> >
> ​​
> vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor> actor =
> >     vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor>::New();
> >
> > into
> >
> >   auto actor = vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor>::New();
> >
> > I think it would cut down on the number of lines in many examples, and
> > make them more readable. (This would only be done in places where the
> > type of the variable is still clear from the declaration.)
> >
> > Elvis
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Elvis Stansvik
> >> <elvis.stansvik at orexplore.com> wrote:
> >>> 2017-06-22 19:01 GMT+02:00 Bill Lorensen <bill.lorensen at gmail.com>:
> >>>> I prefer vtkSmartPointer because it can be used like any other vtk
> >>>> pointer. No need for a GetPointer() is some cases. The example writer
> >>>> is free to use vtkSmartPointer or vtkNew. But I would leave them as
> >>>> there are.
> >>>
> >>> Right, that's a valid point. But how about auto-fying the
> >>> declarations? (but keep using vtkSmartPointer)
> >>>
> >>> My motivation is that when reading an example, I'm often squinting to
> >>> find the variable names in the declarations, wedged in there somewhere
> >>> between all those type names and angle brackets. Especially as the
> >>> lines are often broken due to running long.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Other cleanup's sound great. I've also started using vtkNamedColors
> >>>> instead of setting float values.
> >>>
> >>> Great.
> >>>
> >>> Elvis
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Elvis Stansvik
> >>>> <elvis.stansvik at orexplore.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How about a refactor of the examples to use vtkNew instead of
> >>>>> vtkSmartPointer (where it makes sense)?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> E.g.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   vtkNew<vtkActor> actor;
> >>>>>   actor->SetMapper(mapper);
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   vtkNew<vtkRenderer> renderer;
> >>>>>   renderer->AddActor(actor);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> instead of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor> actor =
> >>>>>     vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor>::New();
> >>>>>   actor->SetMapper(mapper);
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   vtkSmartPointer<vtkRenderer> renderer =
> >>>>>     vtkSmartPointer<vtkRenderer>::New();
> >>>>>   renderer->AddActor(actor);
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think it would help with the readability of the examples. Or are
> >>>>> there other reasons for the prevalent use of vtkSmartPointer?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Another option would be to use auto, e.g.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   auto actor = vtkSmartPointer<vtkActor>::New();
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also, would anyone mind if I did a little naming cleanup, mostly
> >>>>> things like "renwin" -> "window" and "iren" -> "interactor"? Those
> >>>>> abbreviations are not that bad, but I think it's better in examples
> to
> >>>>> spell out the variables in proper English.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If there are no objections, I could try to prepare an MR when time
> >>>>> permits. If so, vtkNew, or auto?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Elvis
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Powered by www.kitware.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/
> opensource/opensource.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=
> vtk-developers
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> >>>>> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com
>
>
>
> --
> Unpaid intern in BillsBasement at noware dot com
>
>

-- 
___________________________________________
Andrew J. P. Maclean

___________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/vtk-developers/attachments/20170623/deaf447b/attachment-0001.html>