Boost logo

Boost :

From: walter_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-11-19 07:14:52

--- In boost_at_y <mailto:boost_at_y>..., Ullrich Koethe < u.koethe_at_c
<mailto:u.koethe_at_c>...> wrote:
> Karl MacMillan wrote:


> > Before considering your library specifically, I would be
interested in what
> > people think about how image processing algorithms could
potentially relate
> > to the Matrix classes currently being worked on for boost.
> I think it would be good to have interoperability between the Matrix
> classes and image processing operations. However, when I last asked
> Matrix people they didn't seem to be interested in this problem. The
> design of a good matrix class was probably enough of a challenge in
> itself.

That's quite true.

> > Also, it seems
> > that it would be helpful to develop a set of multi-dimensional
> > categories analogous to the current STL categories to enable a
more formal
> > separation of the storage of the containers and algorithms.
> I have a formal specification for 2D iterators. The relevant papers
> included in the VIGRA documentation (also available at
> <http://kogs-www.informatik.uni->
> and
> <http://kogs-www.informatik.uni->).
> I could readily write a similar specification for the image data
> structures.

Amongst other things we've written a draft for 2D iterator concepts.
You can find it in the sourceforge CVS
at /boost/libs/numeric/ublas/doc/iterator.htm. I still believe
describing STL-like 2D iterators is a major challenge ;-).
> A more general question is whether iterators are necessary at all.
> Virtually all image data structures support random access, so
> would be sufficient. What's your opinion?

Iterators have an interesting performance behaviour on large data
sets (with most compilers I've seen so far).

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at