A Navaei wrote: > The success of MTL4 based on generic meta-programming, arises the > question about re-visiting the efficiency of code-generation > approaches, including FFC. Given that FEM can particularly benefit > from major meta-programming characteristics, namely static > polymorphism and loop unrolling, MTL4 demonstrates that the > code-generation part can be much more efficiently replaced by inlining > performed at compile-time. >
What FFC and other code generators do is a form of metaprogramming, so I don't see what point you're trying to make. Garth > Without having a concrete meta-programming implementation, it may be > impossible to predict how much performance one would gain compared to > FFC. However, MTL4 has been reported to be many times faster than > code-generation means such as ATLAS. > > Based on this, are there any specific benefits in FFC code-generation > which may not be covered by meta-programming? > > > -Ali > _______________________________________________ > DOLFIN-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev _______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
