Re: [Boost-mpi] No arg init

Subject: Re: [Boost-mpi] No arg init
From: Alain O Miniussi (alain.miniussi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-07-17 06:09:33

Same question 5 month later ?

Best regards,

Alain

On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 10:57 +0100, Alain O Miniussi wrote:
> Hi Matthias,
> 
> Has it been apply on a branch ? I don't think I see it on trunk.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Alain
> 
> On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 23:55 +0100, Matthias Troyer wrote:
> > Hi Alain,
> > 
> > Thank you very much! I'll try to apply it tomorrow. I sometimes prefer the throwing ctor version since my codes often require a certain threading level if they are multi-threaded, but I can add that later.
> > 
> > Matthias
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Jan 28, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Alain O Miniussi <alain.miniussi_at_oca.eu> wrote:
> > 
> > > Oups, forgot to send it to the list.
> > > 
> > > =================================
> > > 
> > > So, here is next patch, I think it integrates all the discussions except
> > > for the throwing ctor, which can be added later if a consensus is
> > > reached.
> > > 
> > > I did modify the documentation, but I do not know how to test those
> > > changes. They are quite simple, but still...
> > > 
> > > As for the throwing ctors, my position was that I do not see a strong
> > > argument in their favor, and would like to see what the user are saying
> > > (as a user, they would be of no use, I'd like to get 'multiple', but
> > > will need to deal with the other possibilities anyway, so throwing is
> > > not a option. But that's just a sample of one).
> > > 
> > > Regards
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 08:27 -0700, Matthias Troyer wrote:
> > >> Thank you! I've committed the patch to config.hpp to the trunk and have also updated the documentation.
> > >> 
> > >> Matthias
> > >> 
> > >> On Jan 16, 2013, at 4:08 PM, Alain O Miniussi <alain.miniussi_at_oca.eu> wrote:
> > >> 
> > >>> There is an attached patch with that change.
> > >>> If it's ok, and once commited, I'll move to the thread init.
> > >>> 
> > >>> 
> > >>> On Mon, 2012-12-31 at 23:05 +0100, Matthias Troyer wrote:
> > >>>> On Dec 4, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Alain O Miniussi <alain.miniussi_at_oca.eu> wrote:
> > >>>> 
> > >>>>> On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 12:55 -0500, Jeremiah Willcock wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2012, Matthias Troyer wrote:
> > >>>>>> 
> > >>>>>>> 
> > >>>>>>> On Nov 29, 2012, at 5:23 PM, Jeremiah Willcock <jewillco_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> 
> > >>>>>>>> Another issue with MPI versions is that Boost.MPI currently uses 
> > >>>>>>>> functions such as MPI_Address that have been removed in MPI 3.0.  Is 
> > >>>>>>>> that something that should be addressed in the future?  I think the 
> > >>>>>>>> replacements for some of them did not exist before MPI 2.0.
> > >>>>>>> 
> > >>>>>>> A valid point - we will have to provide two implementations depending on 
> > >>>>>>> which version of MPI is present. Is there any standardized macro that 
> > >>>>>>> one an check to determine the MPI version at compile time?
> > >>>>>> 
> > >>>>>> There are MPI_VERSION and MPI_SUBVERSION, but those are in 2.0 and above 
> > >>>>>> only as well.  You can probably use their being undefined to mean that the 
> > >>>>>> implementation does not comply to 2.0.  I don't know how many 1.1-only MPI 
> > >>>>>> implementations are around anymore, though; there may not be any still in 
> > >>>>>> use (MPI 2.0 was released in 1997).
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> That's a good point, especially if the "historical" C++ API was not
> > >>>>> present in 1.1 (which I think it's the case, it's not clear to me if it
> > >>>>> was introduced in 1.2 or 2.0). Maybe we should only take into
> > >>>>> consideration 2.0 and 3.0. 
> > >>>>> Also, if some 1.1 only API are still use, how many requires a Boost.MPI
> > >>>>> interface ?
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> As far as the no arg init is concerned, it seems to me that that
> > >>>>> - providing them will simplify the API, 
> > >>>>> - even if some 1.1 only MPI are still around, even if some of them have
> > >>>>> a use for Boost.MPI, even if those do not support a no arg Init, theirs
> > >>>>> users still have the possibility to provide those arguments anyway.
> > >>>>> 
> > >>>>> Alain
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> I checked the implementation and we do have a no arg init for MPI 2.0 or higher since that can be tested by MPI_VERSION. You can also manually define BOOST_MPI_HAS_NOARG_INITIALIZATION to enable it for MPI 1.2 or MPI 1.3 implementations. I assume that this is good enough and we might just want to edit the documentation to make the no arg version the default in the documentation.
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> Matthias
> > >>>> 
> > >>>> 
> > >>> 
> > >>> -- 
> > >>> Alain Miniussi
> > >>> Responsable Tech. Centre de Calcul Haute Performance
> > >>> Obs. de la Côte d'Azur |Mont Gros: [phone]
> > >>> BP 4229                |Sophia :   [phone]
> > >>> 06304 Nice Cedex 4     |https://crimson.oca.eu
> > >>> <mpiinit-r82503.patch>_______________________________________________
> > >>> Boost-mpi mailing list
> > >>> Boost-mpi_at_[hidden]
> > >>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-mpi
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Alain Miniussi
> > > Responsable Tech. Centre de Calcul Haute Performance
> > > Obs. de la Côte d'Azur |Mont Gros: [phone]
> > > BP 4229                |Sophia :   [phone]
> > > 06304 Nice Cedex 4     |https://crimson.oca.eu
> > > 
> > > <mtmpi-82588.patch>_______________________________________________
> > > Boost-mpi mailing list
> > > Boost-mpi_at_[hidden]
> > > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-mpi
> > 
> > 
> 

-- 
Alain Miniussi
Pôle Génie Logiciel Scientifique.
Responsable Tech. Centre de Calcul Haute Performance
Obs. de la Côte d'Azur |Mont Gros: [phone]
BP 4229                |Sophia :   [phone]
06304 Nice Cedex 4     |https://crimson.oca.eu