@LaurentBerger Thanks for the contribution! Could you provide some use-case for the new function?

@LaurentBerger Thanks for the patch. The PR was discussed on OpenCV core team meeting and the team decided to reject the patch. Reasons:

• The No strong definition of API. There is no use-case for the function.
• The same may be done without extra function.

• There is no use-case for the function.

there is this #24158
Where is use case of imagesfromblob?

• The same may be done without extra function.

Yes it is true for imread too

@LaurentBerger At first, thank you for all your contributions to this project!

imagesfromblob

This is just an another example of bad designed function:

• bad name - according to implementation it should be extractImagesFromNCWHBlob().
• function is still not used (so it is not needed at all, no use-case)
• there is no way to provide generic well specified/defined/clear API for that (too many options are here as "blob" is anything like ND-tensor)
• Now, OpenCV API has cv::transposeND() to perform similar operations. With help of .reshape() + ROI you could get the same result. It is better to provide "basic" operations to keep code clean (and have clean OpenCV API).

So, we need to avoid of repeating of such experience.

Adding function which returns "reference" (not a copy) on the data is a problem with bindings. E.g. in Python code use numpy directly instead.