Boost logo

Boost :

From: Cristianno Martins (cristiannomartins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-02 16:50:40

Hello again,

first of all, thank you for comments.

That is certainly an interesting project. When you submit your GSoC
> application, please identify exactly which library you plan to
> parallelize with OpenMP, and which parts of that library you will
> parallelize.
> - Doug

Well, I enumerated three libraries that I could parallelize with OpenMP in
the project. Therefore, I did't specify how I'd parallelize them, because
(in the project) one of the tasks to be done after choose a library is to
identify the bottlenecks. So, I thought I should do this at that moment.
Furthermore, if I have opportunity to parallelize more than three libraries,
it'll be necessary to do this step for the others libraries; so, why mustn't
I do it for all of them?

> Just a quick question. Wouldn't be TBB the better choice instead of
> > OpenMP?
> I can see good reasons for both options. TBB will make it easier to
> implement task-oriented parallel algorithms, but it brings with it a
> dependency on a non-Boost library. OpenMP is reasonably good at data
> parallelism (and can require fewer changes to algorithms where it
> applies), and depends on features available in many compilers, but it
> isn't as widely applicable as TBB. I think you choice will be dictated
> mainly by the library you choose, and how you think you will need to
> parallelize that library.
> - Doug

The use of TBB is a really good idea, so I could parallelize each chosen
library in Boost with the best library to that case (between OpenMP and
TBB). What do you think about it?


Cristianno Martins
Mastering in Computer Science
State University of Campinas
skype: cristiannomartins
gTalk: cristiannomartins
msn: cristiannomartins_at_[hidden] (rarely used)

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at