This is minutia now, but this statement is nonsense (it triggers -Waddress and is meaningless).
38.66 + if (&y_array) y_array = PETSC_NULL; On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Paul Mullowney <paulm at txcorp.com> wrote: > >> I moved all CUSPARSE functions into seqcusparse/aijcusparse.cu (and a >> similar mpi version). I was asked to do this some months ago. I did my >> best. I think it is significantly improved from before. >> >> I was also asked by multiple people to attempt to get Complex GPU >> capabilities working. I succeeded by making changes to petscmath.h. As Jed >> pointed out, some of the changes may have not been C99 compliant. >> > > It needs to work with C89, not just C99. Global changes to handle complex > should also be done in separate patches. > > I hate the idea that CUSP leaks out into user code so I would recommend > casting internally rather than changing it globally. That should also > enable use of complex without requiring the user to adopt a C++ compiler > for their own code (C99 _Complex is binary-compatible with std::complex and > cusp::complex). > > >> >> There is one commented out function in aijcusparse.cu. That can easily >> be fixed. >> >> Many of the other changes (especially to .cu) files were made to protect >> against builds breaking because many of the CUSP preconditioners do not >> support complex arithmetic. >> > > Those should absolutely be in separate patches. Lumping it all into one > makes it impossible to review or test. > > >> >> I have asked for input from multiple people on several occasions and not >> gotten responses. >> >> What am I to do if I ask for input/feedback and don't get it????? >> > > Next time, please provide the patch series. You could use "hg email" or > post your branch to bitbucket or elsewhere so that we can comment. > > Also, please follow the coding guidelines. There is a developer's manual > and frequent discussion on petsc-dev about conventions. (If you notice > something that is adopted, but not in the developer's manual, please point > it out on the mailing list or make a patch.) > > >> >> >> -Paul >> >> >> >> >> There are essentially no comments on this massive push. I was just >> reading it, getting mad. Jed mailed first. >> Pushes need enough comments that I can see exactly what functionality is >> being added and how it works. >> You will not be the maintainer of this functionality, we will. If we >> can't do it, it will be thrown out, and all your >> time will be wasted. >> >> Matt >> >> >>> >>>> This is non-portable: >>>>> >>>>> http://petsc.cs.iit.edu/petsc/petsc-dev/rev/66ca8db0d5f8 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Can we please institute some sort of policy on patch >>>>> quality/reviewability? This one patch is going to take a significant >>>>> amount >>>>> of fix-up (not made easier by the several merges since) and/or generate >>>>> several build failures and user inconvenience (petsc-maints). No doubt the >>>>> functionality is important, but we just don't have time to fix these >>>>> things >>>>> line-by-line after they are pushed. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their >> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their >> experiments lead. >> -- Norbert Wiener >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120628/c3e7cc6f/attachment.html>
