From: John Fletcher (J.P.Fletcher_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-30 07:07:20
Thank you that is very helpful.
Doug Gregor wrote:
> On Jun 29, 2006, at 10:29 AM, John Fletcher wrote:
>>Does this library make any use of the work done in OOMPI
>>which also provides a C++ interface for MPI?
> I work in the Open Systems Lab, which is also responsible for OOMPI,
> so we're well-aware of OOPMPI and there's definitely some
> institutional mindshare. That said, OOMPI and the candidate Boost.MPI
> take rather different approaches to presenting MPI in C++.
> Architecturally, OOMPI is, well, OO: it relies on inheritance,
> virtual functions, and overloading for abstraction. Boost.MPI is
> build using Generic Programming, so it relies on templates, traits,
> and specialization for abstraction. Boost.MPI is meant to fit in best
> with the style of programming used in STL and Boost, with function
> objects, integration with Boost.Serialization, etc.
> I think there's also a philosophical difference between the two.
> OOMPI provides some syntactic innovations (such as ports) that can
> make MPI easier to use. Boost.MPI is a little more "purist",
> attempting to keep the flavor of the C MPI bindings while adapting
> better to modern C++. We still "send" in the same way as "MPI_Send"
> in Boost.MPI. Of course, should something like ports be useful, they
> could be added as syntactic sugar.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk