Subject: Re: [boost] Review of a safer memory management approach for C++?
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-06-05 08:40:52
on Sat Jun 05 2010, "Belcourt, Kenneth" <kbelco-AT-sandia.gov> wrote:
> Hi Ross,
> On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:29 PM, Bartlett, Roscoe A wrote:
> Take my comments with a grain of salt as I'm biased having interacted with both you
> and Trililnos for the last decade or so.
In other words, unlike me, you know what you're talking about :-)
>> I will argue below that more C++ programs are better served by using more of #2
>> object-oriented C++ and to a lesser extent template-based methods in #3 and #4
>> (except where it is called for in lower-level code).
> Someone, I think David, asked for a concrete example. A well known example is
> matrices and, for exposition, the additive schwarz algorithm described in Saad's
> Iterative Methods for Sparse Linear Systems, page 401, section 13.3.3, available
This is to say nothing of the fact that OO is incapable of representing
even the simplest binary mathematical operations polymorphically without
losing type safety
has its place, but the binary method problem is such a huge obstacle for
the design of mathematical frameworks that I'm very surprised to hear
arguments that OO serves most C++ programs best coming from someone in
the HPC community.
P.S. what's the frequency, Kenneth? Does Noel have a brother at
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk