| Re: IDL vs JAVA/JAI [message #37482] |
Tue, 23 December 2003 08:59 |
Michael Wallace
Messages: 409 Registered: December 2003
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> Does anyone have any experience with this set of packages? If the
> capability is the same, I'm apt to choose JAI since it limits the
> number of languages in my project and keeps me to a real
> object-oriented framework. However, I worry it doesn't include some
> of the functionality I may need and I have no experience with the
> library -- can it be as good as it sounds?
>
> [Oh, and my project deals primarily with large images that are warped,
> added and divided, selected with an ROI, etc. I'd like the interface
> to be nice for the users.]
I have never used JAI, but looks promising for the work you want to do.
JAI doesn't help me since I'm doing data analysis and plotting the
results rather than image manipulation. If JAI does all that you need
it to do and it does it at an acceptable speed, then there wouldn't be a
need for IDL. However, should you want to do any high-powered analysis
or work with extremely huge data sets, IDL is the way to go.
There is a case for the IDL-Java bridge, however. First of all, this
would allow you to extend your project beyond the bounds of JAI
processing if need be. And you don't have to get into the guts of IDL
should you choose this route. It'd be possible to write a very minimal
IDL program which would only be used for very specific tasks and do
everything else in Java. This would preserve your class structure and
other processing you already have in place. I haven't tried this, but
you should be able to run a Swing/SWT/AWT application through the bridge
and get your nice interface.
Personally, I'd lean toward the IDL-Java Bridge. My scientific
counterparts always ask for new features and new bells and whistles in
my programs and I can never seem to predict what they will want next.
For that reason alone, I'd choose the bridge since I'd have all the
power of IDL at my fingertips should I need to use it.
HTH,
Mike W
|
|
|
|