|
Tags: 2017 source edit, Replaced |
| (24 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | <noinclude>__TOC__ | + | <noinclude>{{documentation/versioncheck}}</noinclude> |
| − | ={{#titleparts: {{PAGENAME}} | | -1 }}=</noinclude><includeonly>
| |
| − | ='''User FAQ: {{{1}}}'''=
| |
| − | </includeonly>
| |
| − | == What is an extension ? ==
| |
| − | {{:Documentation/{{documentation/version}}/Extensions/Description}}
| |
| − | == What is the extensions catalog ? ==
| |
| − | {{:Documentation/{{documentation/version}}/Extensions/Catalog}}
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Why there are no windows 32-bit extensions available ?==
| + | {{documentation/banner |
| − | | + | | text = [https://slicer.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/extensions_manager.html This page has been moved to read-the-docs.] |
| − | * Win 32 has a very limited amount of memory available to an application.
| + | | background-color = 8FBC8F }} |
| − | * Many registration and segmentation algorithms fail on that platform because they run out of memory, when used with state of large data.
| |
| − | * Some of these failures are just that, some can crash slicer. Even though the "real" failure is caused by overextending the capabilities of the hardware (in a way the users fault), it appears to the user that Slicer does not work.
| |
| − | * If you search the archives of slicer-users there are several such complaints until we started to discourage people to use 32 bit.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Discussion: http://massmail.spl.harvard.edu/public-archives/slicer-users/2013/006703.html
| |
