> Hmm, I am not so sure that Guido is telling the truth here ;-) I just had a > chat with him and he agrees ;-) > I hope I didn't start any fight :-) > The kernel only knows about a base class that contains no information > whatsoever about how the domain of a variable is implemented. > > What is perfectly possible is to have variables of different types in the > system that share the same baseclass: the kernel is only concerned with what > is in the baseclass and not with how the variables are implemented. The key > aspect is that variable implementations are only refered to by propagators > and branchings: they statically know the real type so that the right > operations are performed, so no need for virtual etc. > > Look to the generated baseclass IntVarImpBase and how IntVarImp inherits > from it: IntVarImpBase is what the kernel deals with, while IntVarImp is the > real implementation of integer variables. > I've seen that, but what I need to understand is why you need distinct *VarImpBases for Int, Bool, etc., why not just one. The difference I've seen in kernel is that the classes report their own "event id" or whatever, so I guess you use this for speeding up actor filtering. Again, I'm just guessing and will need to look into this.
[...some time passes...] OK, we've added float.vis and recompiled Gecode, so now it seems we have our own bunch of ModEvents and also a FloatVarImpBase, which is cool, so we'll come back with a status report (or more questions) soon :-) > Having said all that, I would first attempt to get everything up for a > single implementation. You can go crazy later ;-) > I guess I'm crazy enough already - nothing ever stops me from making things more generic. Even if it takes 5 minutes to compile... :-)) Cheers, Filip _______________________________________________ Gecode users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users
