[MINC-development] MINC 2.0.19/2.1 and HDF 1.6/1.8

[EJ Nikelski]

Hi all,

   Regarding Claude's suggestion of moving back to a netcdf-based API
... what would this do to those of us who have written fairly large
wacks of minc2 API code?  From my casual perusal of the code, the API
makes calls directly to hdf5 routines, so ...  such a move would
effectively kill the minc2 API (and all of my code), yes?.

Andrew: Just FYI, I also use the apparent dimension ordering feature,
and would be very saddened to see it go.

-Jim


On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 6:52 AM, Andrew Janke <a.janke at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well I don't see a downside, we just remove all the HDF code from
>> MINC2 and push everything back to netcdf. :)  (ie: remove all the
>> switches).
>
> Well on further reading I now see a downside.  netcdf4 _requires_ HDF
> 1.8.x so all we would be doing is shifting the netcdf->hdf glue layer
> from our code to theirs.
>
> netcdf4 also does chunking and all the other things that HDF5 does so
> it is pretty obvious that it is a glue layer to HDF5.
>
> --
> Andrew Janke
> (a.janke at gmail.com || http://a.janke.googlepages.com/)
> Canberra->Australia    +61 (402) 700 883
> _______________________________________________
> MINC-development mailing list
> MINC-development at bic.mni.mcgill.ca
> http://www.bic.mni.mcgill.ca/mailman/listinfo/minc-development
>



-- 
=================================
Jim Nikelski, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Research Fellow
Bloomfield Centre for Research in Aging
Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research
Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General Hospital
McGill University