> I guess it takes a lot of sacrifices to be a developer ; we need to
> torture ourselves instead of the compiler (and the users ;))!
It's an imperfect world we live in...
Best regards,
Karli
PS: This almost philosophical remark was presented free of charge by
viennacl-devel ;-)
I guess it takes a lot of sacrifices to be a developer ; we need to torture
ourselves instead of the compiler (and the users ;))!
Philippe
2014-04-29 17:33 GMT+02:00 Karl Rupp :
> Hi,
>
>
> > See above :-) There are good reasons for dropping infos<>(),
>
>> particularly as we cannot ass
Hi,
> See above :-) There are good reasons for dropping infos<>(),
> particularly as we cannot assume that each OpenCL SDK returns the
> requested information as rapidly as we might need it.
>
>
>
> Hmm, then a good solution would be to internally use infos<> whenever a
> viennacl::oc
Hi,
2014-04-29 16:54 GMT+02:00 Karl Rupp :
> Hi,
>
>
> > It seems like we could save several thousands of lines of code
>
>> (and gain
>> a lot of clarity) by using the C++ API directly.
>>
>>
>> Well, I'm not so sure about that actually. I'd more conservatively
>>
Hi,
> It seems like we could save several thousands of lines of code
> (and gain
> a lot of clarity) by using the C++ API directly.
>
>
> Well, I'm not so sure about that actually. I'd more conservatively
> estimate it in the range of hundreds.
>
>
> Actually, I th
Hi,
2014-04-29 15:59 GMT+02:00 Karl Rupp :
> Hi,
>
>
> > So I can't help but to bring up this topic :) Is there any reason why
>
>> we're using the OpenCL C API instead of the C++ one?
>>
>
> Yes, the reason is simple: The C++ API was standardized quite some time
> *after* the development of Vie
Hi,
> So I can't help but to bring up this topic :) Is there any reason why
> we're using the OpenCL C API instead of the C++ one?
Yes, the reason is simple: The C++ API was standardized quite some time
*after* the development of ViennaCL started.
> It seems like we could save several thousand
