Hey, On 11:38 Tue 20 Oct , Hartmut Kaiser wrote: > > BTW: I was using HPX commit a725d04b0d9ed7c846310c20a259c8bbfc643661. > > BTW, we said before that the way you use > register_with_basename/find_all_from_basename is not the way it was designed > to be used.
but is it wrong? IIUC the difference between register_with_basename() and register_with_name() is in my case that the former adds an integer which just happens to be 0. > Does it also hang if you use it as designed? What I mean is to > call register_with_basename with the sequence number of the current patch > and let find_all_from_basename() return all registered names for the given > base name. Also, use 4 different base names for the for neighboring patches > of the current one. I can't use consecutive numbers for this case as locality neighborhoods may be sparse and global knowledge would be required to enumerate them. Example: Locality 0 may be neighboring 1, 5, 7, 9. This does not imply that for instance 9 is also neighboring 5. So I wouldn't know how to assign numbers to all neighbors of locality 0. I could use register_with_name() though. > That would also allow to decouple the number of patches from the number of > localities (which is what we want anyways). I'm not sure if I got this right. What constitutes a basename? I add the numerical ID to all strings, so in a way those are already different. Thanks! -Andreas -- ========================================================== Andreas Schäfer HPC and Grid Computing Department of Computer Science 3 Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany +49 9131 85-27910 PGP/GPG key via keyserver http://www.libgeodecomp.org ========================================================== (\___/) (+'.'+) (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination!
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ hpx-users mailing list [email protected] https://mail.cct.lsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/hpx-users
