Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
From: Tom Brinkman (reportbase2007_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-23 22:52:03

Thanks.

I took a quick at at this library's requirements.

The vsiplplusplus library uses IPP and MKL, which are both just "C"
libraries that wrap the low level hardware intrinsics necessary to
create accelerated graphics code.   Still just plain "C" though.  I
know this because I've worked with the IPP guys.

vsiplplusplus appears to be just like every other C++ graphics
library, in that it just puts a pretty C++ face onto an otherwise ugly
C graphics library.

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On 03/23/2010 09:11 PM, Tom Brinkman wrote:
>>
>> I'd be curious to know more about what your talking about.  Do you have a
>> link or something that could illustrate a C++ graphics library that uses
>> boost style functors and other modern C++ techniques.
>>
>
> I was mentioning GPU-acceleration, but not in the context of "graphics library", but rather HPC code (specifically, signal- and image processing: Sourcery VSIPL++ (http://www.codesourcery.com/vsiplplusplus/)
>
> It uses expression templates heavily, and makes use of metaprogramming, for example to determine optimal implementations for operations, depending on data types, size, and alignment.
>
> An example of a domain where C++ can outperform the equivalent C API is where it can fuse expression evaluation, something that is much harder to do in C, where the compiler doesn't have the luxury of a strong type system, and thus can't quite as easily optimize away temporaries, or do compile-time dispatching.
>
>    Stefan
>
> --
>
>      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost