On Sat, 18 Sep 2010, Dejan Pangercic wrote:

> Dear Herman,
>> Example from ROS: the point cloud. This is the first (and currently still
>> only?) example where the resource sharing between different clients and
>> producers resulted in an unmaintainable situation. I do have the opinion (I
>> can be wrong!) that this particular problem was solved in a particular way,
>> without any effort to make it into a reusable template for all resource
>> sharing problems. But I repeat: I can be wrong, since it is impossible to
>> keep track of all software within the ROS ecosystem. And that fact also
>> is not a good omen for maintainability...
> Can you be a bit more specific here? Are you talking about:
> a)PointCloud message,
> b)PointCloud2 message,
> c)PCL's templated "pcl::PointCloud< PointT >" class
> d)PCL,
> e)...?
>

If this list is so long (and you seem to suggest that it might even
longer...), then it only proves my point: what is really reusable in this
whole cloud of PointCloud development? :-)

But (to try) to answer our question: it can only be in the class, in my
opinion, since that's the only place where code is accessing the point
cloud resource, isn't it?

Herman