image processing library

Discussion in 'C++' started by Obnoxious User, Mar 21, 2008.

  1. On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 02:39:38 -0700, mohangupta13 wrote:

    > can anyone help me where to find the best image processing library for
    > c++
    > mohan gupta


    And "best" is stipulated by what requirements?

    --
    OU
    Obnoxious User, Mar 21, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    can anyone help me where to find the best image processing library for
    c++
    mohan gupta
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Obnoxious User

    Razii Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 02:39:38 -0700 (PDT),
    wrote:

    >can anyone help me where to find the best image processing library for
    >c++
    >mohan gupta



    Too bad not there in c++ standard library :)
    Razii, Mar 21, 2008
    #3
  4. <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : can anyone help me where to find the best image processing library for
    : c++
    : mohan gupta

    You'll have to google for one. There are many different solutions
    and levels of complexity, depending on the features you need,
    and the platform/tools you want to work with.

    Best would be to ask on a platform-specific forum
    (Windows/KDE/Gnome depending on the OS, DirectX/OpenGL
    depending on what you want to use for rendering).


    --
    http://ivan.vecerina.com/contact/?subject=NG_POST <- email contact form
    Brainbench MVP for C++ <> http://www.brainbench.com
    Ivan Vecerina, Mar 21, 2008
    #4
  5. Obnoxious User

    Razii Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:20:55 +0100, "Ivan Vecerina"
    <> wrote:

    >Best would be to ask on a platform-specific forum
    >(Windows/KDE/Gnome depending on the OS, DirectX/OpenGL
    > depending on what you want to use for rendering).


    Exactly. That was exactly the answer I got years ago when I asked
    something on this newsgroup.

    "Don't waste of precious time -- ask in windows news newsgroup."

    Now how on earth is imaging, networking, threading is all
    plateform-specific, bit IO isn't and is included in standard library?
    Razii, Mar 21, 2008
    #5
  6. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    On Mar 21, 8:03 am, Razii <> wrote:

    > Now how on earth is imaging, networking, threading is all
    > plateform-specific, bit IO isn't and is included in standard library?


    C++ is a general purpose programming language. There are platforms on
    which it runs that don't require imaging, threading, networking,
    etc. Why bloat the standard library and carry it around where it
    isn't needed?

    You also have more choices in C++, and the ability to port already
    portable open-source libraries to another platform. How would you
    port Java to a platform where it's not supported?
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #6
  7. Obnoxious User

    Razii Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:21:41 -0700 (PDT),
    wrote:

    >C++ is a general purpose programming language.


    Yawn. How is IO general purpose programming? It's platform specific.
    If IO is general purpose, then so is networking, threading, and
    especially imaging (as the question was about imaging).

    >You also have more choices in C++, and the ability to port already
    >portable open-source libraries to another platform.


    C++ is much harder to port. Everyone agrees with that. For Java, in
    most cases, the person won't even have to recompile his class file.

    >How would you port Java to a platform where it's not supported?


    Huh? How would you port your C++ to a platform if there is no C++
    compiler for it?
    Razii, Mar 21, 2008
    #7
  8. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    On Mar 21, 8:36 am, Razii <> wrote:

    > >How would you port Java to a platform where it's not supported?

    >
    > Huh?  How would you port your C++ to a platform if there is no C++
    > compiler for it?


    You would either use a cross-compiler, or perhaps port the gcc
    compiler, or just not port. Fortunately, C++ is available on more
    platforms than any other language.

    My point is, have you tried to port the JDK source code to another
    platform? If not, why?
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #8
  9. Obnoxious User

    Razii Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:47:52 -0700 (PDT),
    wrote:

    >You would either use a cross-compiler, or perhaps port the gcc
    >compiler, or just not port. Fortunately, C++ is available on more
    >platforms than any other language.


    And you could be using third-part libraries that even a c++ compiler
    on that platform might not compile.

    >My point is, have you tried to port the JDK source code to another
    >platform? If not, why?


    You don't have to. If JVM is available on that platform, you should be
    able to run the same compiled files without even having to recompile.
    Razii, Mar 21, 2008
    #9
  10. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    On Mar 21, 9:05 am, Razii <> wrote:

    > >My point is, have you tried to port the JDK source code to another
    > >platform?  If not, why?

    >
    > You don't have to. If JVM is available on that platform, you should be
    > able to run the same compiled files without even having to recompile.


    You're dodging the question. If the JVM is not available and you
    would like to port it, how would you go about doing so?
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #10
  11. Obnoxious User

    Razii Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 07:16:25 -0700 (PDT),
    wrote:

    >You're dodging the question. If the JVM is not available and you
    >would like to port it, how would you go about doing so?


    That's like saying how would you port c++ to a platform that doesn't
    have a c++ compiler.

    First you will port JVM to that platform, then you will run the same
    compiled files on that JVM. Your answer was also same. You said that
    first you will port the compiler, then port the source files and
    RECOMPILE. In Java's case, first you will port JVM.

    If no one is willing to port JVM to that platform, then someone still
    will have to port some kind of native Java compiler (like JET), but if
    they do that, why not just port JVM? I see no difference between c++
    and Java here.
    Razii, Mar 21, 2008
    #11
  12. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    On Mar 21, 9:39 am, Razii <> wrote:

    > If no one is willing to port JVM to that platform, then someone still
    > will have to port some kind of native Java compiler (like JET), but if
    > they do that, why not just port JVM? I see no difference between c++
    > and Java here.


    There's much more to port with a JVM, because of the enormity of the
    standard library. With C++, a common axiom is "you pay for what you
    use". If my application is a small single-threaded OpenGL
    application, there is no need to carry around GUI, database, threads,
    networking, etc. If the need arises, I choose which library I want to
    use.

    In practice, for what Java is used mostly for (enterprise
    applications), you probably do need to carry that stuff around. C++
    is used in a wider variety of application domains, however, and a huge
    standard library would be prohibitive to the portability of classes of
    applications.
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #12
  13. Alberto Bignotti, Mar 21, 2008
    #13
  14. Obnoxious User

    Razii Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 08:12:51 -0700 (PDT),
    wrote:

    >In practice, for what Java is used mostly for (enterprise
    >applications),


    Not true. Java is widely used on mobile devices (like phones). And
    they have Java ME platform for that. Also, applications based on Java
    are portable from one mobile device to a different mobile device (as
    long as the mobile device has JVM). And you also need networking,
    threading and image prepossessing on these devices. Guess what? They
    are not in C++ standard library.

    What BitTorrent client do you use? The most popular BitTorrent client
    is Azureus. That's written in Java. Obviously there are more usage of
    java than server apps.
    Razii, Mar 21, 2008
    #14
  15. Obnoxious User

    Jack Klein Guest

    On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:47:52 -0700 (PDT),
    wrote in comp.lang.c++:

    > On Mar 21, 8:36 am, Razii <> wrote:
    >
    > > >How would you port Java to a platform where it's not supported?

    > >
    > > Huh?  How would you port your C++ to a platform if there is no C++
    > > compiler for it?

    >
    > You would either use a cross-compiler, or perhaps port the gcc
    > compiler, or just not port. Fortunately, C++ is available on more
    > platforms than any other language.


    You went to far with this statement, it is flatly incorrect. It is C,
    not C++, that is the most widely available language. There is a C
    compiler for every platform that has a C++ implementation, the one
    included in the C++ package, if no others.

    But there are C compilers for a vast number of platforms, most notably
    embedded systems and digital signal processors, that do not have C++
    compilers.

    --
    Jack Klein
    Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
    FAQs for
    comp.lang.c http://c-faq.com/
    comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c -faq-lite/
    alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++
    http://www.club.cc.cmu.edu/~ajo/docs/FAQ-acllc.html
    Jack Klein, Mar 21, 2008
    #15
  16. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    On Mar 21, 11:32 am, Jack Klein <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:47:52 -0700 (PDT),
    > wrote in comp.lang.c++:
    >
    > > On Mar 21, 8:36 am, Razii <> wrote:

    >
    > > > >How would you port Java to a platform where it's not supported?

    >
    > > > Huh?  How would you port your C++ to a platform if there is no C++
    > > > compiler for it?

    >
    > > You would either use a cross-compiler, or perhaps port the gcc
    > > compiler, or just not port.  Fortunately, C++ is available on more
    > > platforms than any other language.

    >
    > You went to far with this statement, it is flatly incorrect.  It is C,
    > not C++, that is the most widely available language.  There is a C
    > compiler for every platform that has a C++ implementation, the one
    > included in the C++ package, if no others.
    >
    > But there are C compilers for a vast number of platforms, most notably
    > embedded systems and digital signal processors, that do not have C++
    > compilers.


    Point ceded. I thought of this after hitting "Send" and prayed that
    it wouldn't pass before the eyes of a C programmer.
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #16
  17. Obnoxious User

    Guest

    On Mar 21, 10:54 am, Razii <> wrote:

    > Not true. Java is widely used on mobile devices (like phones). And
    > they have Java ME platform for that. Also, applications based on Java
    > are portable from one mobile device to a different mobile device (as
    > long as the mobile device has JVM). And you also need networking,
    > threading and image prepossessing on these devices. Guess what? They
    > are not in C++ standard library.  


    So you need a new type of Java platform for mobile devices? And how
    many different APIs do you have to download (http://java.sun.com/
    javame/reference/apis.jsp#api)? How is that different than
    downloading and using C++ libraries?
    , Mar 21, 2008
    #17
  18. Razii wrote:
    > On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 06:47:52 -0700 (PDT),
    > wrote:
    >
    >> You would either use a cross-compiler, or perhaps port the gcc
    >> compiler, or just not port. Fortunately, C++ is available on more
    >> platforms than any other language.

    >
    > And you could be using third-part libraries that even a c++ compiler
    > on that platform might not compile.
    >
    >> My point is, have you tried to port the JDK source code to another
    >> platform? If not, why?

    >
    > You don't have to. If JVM is available on that platform,

    --------------------^^^^

    And you have exactly the same situation here.
    *if* there is no JVM, the holy Java is useless.

    Please, if you are serious but not a school kid and you intent to make a
    serious sign using your name.

    Cheers
    --
    Mateusz Loskot
    http://mateusz.loskot.net
    Mateusz Loskot, Mar 21, 2008
    #18
  19. wrote:
    > can anyone help me where to find the best image
    > processing library for c++


    You may want to look at the Adobe Generic Image Library (GIL).
    You can find support for some aspects of image processing in GDAL
    library (http://gdal.org/).

    Greetings
    --
    Mateusz Loskot
    http://mateusz.loskot.net
    Mateusz Loskot, Mar 21, 2008
    #19
  20. Obnoxious User

    Default User Guest

    wrote:

    > On Mar 21, 8:36 am, Razii <> wrote:
    >
    > Fortunately, C++ is available on more platforms than any
    > other language.


    I find that difficult to believe.



    Brian
    Default User, Mar 21, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    3,291
  2. Guch
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    415
    Catalin Pitis
    Mar 22, 2006
  3. polemon
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    475
    zeppe
    Jul 22, 2007
  4. Yingqi Tang
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    249
    Clifford Heath
    May 18, 2007
  5. Malcolm McLean

    Binary Image processing library

    Malcolm McLean, Aug 11, 2012, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    762
    Malcolm McLean
    Aug 18, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page