On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Barry Smith
<bsmith@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
Absolutely. And if it turns out to be too much of a pain to write and maintain such a kernel there is something wrong with our programming model and code development system. The right system should make all the complexity fall away; when the complexity becomes too much of a bear you know you have the wrong system.
So do we manage blocks using internal C++ templates, "templates in C", C generated using some other system (m4 anyone?), or something else entirely?
Yes! Finally, we acknowledge that this a problem.
1) C++ templates are not a solution to anything. ANYTHING.
2) I am assuming "templates in C" would work somewhat like a templating engine.
I tried this for the last TOMS paper with Andy. Its was just not a big payoff for
the work put in, and definitely did not justify incorporating another package.
3) I prefer C generated from another system, like the one I use for FEM (which I am
not attached to). We will definitely need this for GPU kernels, and I am guessing
thread kernels if they are going to be worth something.
Matt
--
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead.
-- Norbert Wiener