Re: [Boost-mpi] No arg init

Subject: Re: [Boost-mpi] No arg init
From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-07-17 12:17:06

I thought I had applied it a while ago and wanted to move it over to the release branch this week. Let me check.

Matthias

On Jul 17, 2013, at 3:09, Alain O Miniussi <alain.miniussi_at_oca.eu> wrote:

> 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
>