2

I actually like the clean approach of Boost.GIL, standardized libraries are cool and Adobe certainly put some thought in it but when comparing to libs such as OpenCV its feature set is marginal. Do you use GIL and for what purposes?

Mark Ingram
  • 71,849
  • 51
  • 176
  • 230
hannes
  • 966
  • 9
  • 13
  • 5
    Why are you asking one question in the title, and a completely different one in the question body? Is the question whether Boost.GIL is dead (no longer being maintained), or if it is a *good* choice compared to OpenCV,or if **I** use GIL? You'll get better answers if it's clear what you're asking. – jalf Oct 18 '10 at 13:28

3 Answers3

2

Boost.GIL is not dead. There is a few maintainers interested in keeping the project up to date, fixing bugs, helping contributors to bring new features, etc.

Boost.GIL is preparing for refreshing release as part of the upcoming Boost 1.68, including new I/O implementation accepted to Boost.GIL during the official Boost review a longer while ago.

Stay tuned and if you have any specific questions, feel free to post to the official boost-gil mailing list

mloskot
  • 37,086
  • 11
  • 109
  • 136
0

Boost is a widely accepted set of libraries, but it's not in the C++ standard. So don't feel that you've violated the ANSI/ISO code of conduct by using something that better suits your needs.

chrisaycock
  • 36,470
  • 14
  • 88
  • 125
  • 2
    It's more the other way around; I actually feel bad about using opencv as it is a messy pile of code instead of a cleanly written lib. – hannes Oct 18 '10 at 12:54
  • Well, there's always that. But some problems call for a brute-force solution. You might have to just grit your teeth on this one. – chrisaycock Oct 18 '10 at 13:04
  • Does Boost.GIL do what you need? If not, it's not much of an option and you'll have to use OpenCV: If it does, and you feel it is better code, why not use it? – jalf Oct 18 '10 at 13:29
  • 3
    There is no clean *and* useful lib for image processing. It is complicated (there are many types to handle, and each type has unique features), it has to be fast (favors hand-optimized single case over generic or computer-optimized code), there are many shortcuts or special conversion rules required (to avoid loss of precision and minimize unnecessary type conversions), and bundling of useful algorithms for image processing or computer vision (contributed by many researchers; not all of them programming gurus). All you can ask for is a *clean interface*. The internals are always messy. – rwong Jul 06 '11 at 00:10
0

Do not use boost gil, recently I tried to use it to do a "complex" task of reading a png file, but for that it requires installing a bunch of libraries that have no install documentation for Windows, and to make matters worse gil documentation suggest the following regarding libpng and libjpeg(in year 2020):

The user has to make sure this library is properly installed. I strongly recommend the user to build the library yourself. It could potentially save you a lot of trouble.

NoSenseEtAl
  • 28,205
  • 28
  • 128
  • 277