Rename IncrementalICP IncrementalRegistration

[jspricke]

No description provided.

[jspricke]

As discussed in #1426

[taketwo]

I was wondering if we need two separate classes for "incremental" and "meta" registration. The only difference is whether a full cloud is accumulated or not. This could be controlled just with a switch. What do you think?

[SergioRAgostinho]

I'm ok with having separate class entities for incremental and meta registration.

Nevertheless, what I think it would be actually sexy to have is to use them in "similar" to what it's done in NormalEstimation.setSearchMethod(), but something called setRegistrationStrategy(). Both incremental and meta would derive from a RegistrationStrategy base class, and any class derived from Registrationwould have access to it, and further matching strategies.

Ps: I really think the prefix meta gives no clue whatsoever on the matching strategy applied.

[taketwo]

Ps: I really think the prefix meta gives no clue whatsoever on the matching strategy applied.

Exactly. And from what I see the code doing, I would rather call it "incremental".

[SergioRAgostinho]

Ignore my last comment, I should've looked before writing. You're right @taketwo, it's too similar to be worth an entire new class. A switch should be more than enough.

[jspricke]

We discussed the name over here and it's in use since at least since ten years in various papers.
Regarding putting both in one class, I think it's semantically sufficiently different to have two classes.
If no one objects, I will merge #1426 this evening.

[SergioRAgostinho]

👍

[taketwo]

Leaving aside semantics, the diff between the source code of these classes is very small.

[taketwo]

But anyway, I'm fine with having two classes.