The TransplantPlaceArray, TransplantResetArray was very experimental and should have not have been committed. I removed it.
> 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 > <mailto:jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov>> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Paul Mullowney <paulm at txcorp.com > <mailto:paulm at txcorp.com>> wrote: > > I moved all CUSPARSE functions into seqcusparse/aijcusparse.cu > <http://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 > <http://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/20120628/58543da2/attachment-0001.html>
