2009/3/23 Garth N. Wells <[email protected]>: > > > 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.
As mentioned above, we are talking about compile-time implicit inline code generation which is opposed to explicit code generation as done by FFC -- refer to MTL publications. -Ali > > 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
