Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Flow-based programming library for Boost?
From: Julian Gonggrijp (j.gonggrijp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-17 14:17:36

Dave Abrahams wrote:

> on Sun Dec 16 2012, Julian Gonggrijp wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> concurrency might be completely wasted unless you're able to take
>>> advantage of pipelining.
>> Isn't execution of linearly dependent operations always a pipeline?
> Yes, but pipelining doesn't help if the input period exceeds the
> pipeline latency.

I think I see your point and I agree.

>> Assuming that, isn't every [edge] in a dependency graph a pipeline by
>> itself?
> I suppose it's a degenerate pipeline, but I don't know what you're
> getting at.

I was meaning to hint that pipelining is a *necessity* whenever
there's such a thing as a dependency graph, so there would really be
no question of whether you can take advantage of it or not (you /have/
to). In retrospect I understand you meant that there's not always a
speed benefit in doing the pipelining concurrently. Now your statement
turns out to be a tautology. ;-)

>> Assuming that, isn't pipelining the entire purpose of any form of
>> computational composition?
> IMO the purpose of computational composition is to manage complexity
> through re-use.

Well spoken.
(This is a hidden agreement.)

>>> [...]
>> [...]
> Yes.

I'll assume that means "no dispute here".


PS: could you be so kind to mangle email addresses in your quote
attribution lines, or perhaps leave them out entirely?

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