Re: [glas] Concept C++ [was Re: back to business}
From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-22 12:32:24
On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 14:52 +0100, Ian McCulloch wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006, Karl Meerbergen wrote:
> > I think we should consider this. Is concept-gcc stable now?
> I think it is, although last time I checked there were some issues with
> compile times that ought to go away in the final version.
Yes. Thankfully, there are also some tricks to help improve compilation
performance. Of course, we are also working to improve compilation
performance and stability.
> Aside from
> spending a few hours reading the proposal, I have never used concept gcc.
> Maybe someone else on this list has? My impression was though, it would
> be the killer feature for linear algebra libs.
I believe Concept C++ could be a big help in the design and
implementation of GLAS, because it will allow you to ensure that the
concepts you write down are actually the concepts that you use, and
should make writing correct generic algorithms simpler. That said, you
should not depend on ConceptGCC as your only compiler: it is a prototype
for a not-yet-standard variant of C++. We have some experience with
writing generic libraries that provide the same behavior with and
without concepts. This allows us to develop with concepts (to make sure
we get things right) but deploy code that works on existing C++
compilers. This is the approach I would recommend, and of course we'll
be happy to help.
Although I am not well-versed in linear algebra, as the primary author
of ConceptGCC I will be happy to help with any questions or technical
issues regarding Concept C++ and ConceptGCC. I do lurk on the GLAS list,
but if I seem slow to respond to a query, please ping me directly.
Open Systems Lab @ Indiana University