On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Roy Stogner wrote:
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Derek Gaston wrote:
On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Roy Stogner <royst...@ices.utexas.edu>
wrote:
The only downside I can see is that "broadcast(stuff)" is more terse
than "broadcast(stuff.begin(), stuff.end())".
To me, this is a pretty big downside. I love the simplicity of
broadcast(stuff). If you want to make broadcast(stuff) turn around
and call broadcast(begin, end) that's fine with me... but I think we
should maintain the broadcast(stuff) option for the most common
cases.
Okay. "broadcast(stuff) calls broadcast(stuff.begin(), stuff.end())"
is probably what I'll do, then.
As long as I'm asking about Parallel:: design decisions - what's the
intended usage for the DataType argument to our methods which take
containers-of-T? I understand that for non-built-in types we need to
tell MPI how to send them, but that can be done by specializing
StandardType<T>. It seems like an input data type would only be
useful if you wanted to be able to communicate the same C++-type as
multiple *different* MPI types.
---
Roy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
