So this is the code...I have ommitted some parts to make it more clear...
the error I get is the following
x10c: ----------
1. ERROR in /home/kwnouli/Desktop/x10/uniComm.java (at line 421)
SumReducer $_obj = new SumReducer((java.lang.System[]) null);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The constructor Reducible.SumReducer(System[]) is undefined
----------
2. ERROR in /home/kwnouli/Desktop/x10/uniComm.java (at line 423)
return $_deserialize_body($_obj, $deserializer);
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The method $_deserialize_body(uniComm.SumReducer, X10JavaDeserializer)
in the type uniComm.SumReducer is not applicable for the arguments
(Reducible.SumReducer, X10JavaDeserializer)
----------
2 problems (2 errors)
x10c: Non-zero return code: 255
2 errors.
And I cannot understand why it tries to deserialize the body object since I
only need the e: Double value...
Am I missing something?
Thanks again Josh
Regards,
Konstantina
2013/7/1 Konstantina Panagiotopoulou <kwno...@hotmail.com>
> Hey Josh,
>
> I used the code you provided above.
>
>
> public def Advance(dt:double) {
> val directEnergy = finish(SumReducer()) {
>
>
> finish ateach(pl in bodies) {
>
> var e:Double = 0.0;
>
>
> val myBodies : Rail[Body] =bodies(pl);
> val toSent = new Rail[Body](myBodies.size as Int,
> (i:Int)=>new Body(myBodies(i).mass,myBodies(i).posx, myBodies(i).posy,
> myBodies(i).posz, myBodies(i).velx, myBodies(i).vely, myBodies(i).velz));
> val nextPlace = here.next();
> if (nextPlace != here) {
> @Uncounted at(nextPlace) async {
> atomic {
> otherBodies(nextPlace.id)(pl) = toSent;
> }
> }
> }
> for (i in 0..(myBodies.size-1)) {
> val bodyI = myBodies(i);
>
> e+= 0.5 * bodyI.mass * (bodyI.velx*bodyI.velx + bodyI.vely*bodyI.vely +
> bodyI.velz*bodyI.velz);
> for (j in 0..(i-1)) {
>
> val bodyJ = myBodies(j);
>
> //code to update my bodies' velocity ...
> val dx: double = bodyI.posx - bodyJ.posx;
> val dy: double = bodyI.posy - bodyJ.posy;
> val dz: double = bodyI.posz - bodyJ.posz;
> var d2: double = dx*dx + dy*dy + dz*dz;
> e-= (bodyI.mass*bodyJ.mass) / Math.sqrt(d2);
> }
> }
> offer e;
> }
>
> var target : Place = nextPlace.next();
> var source : Place = here.prev();
> while (source != here) {
> if (target != here) {
> // send myBodies (toSent) to the next target
> place
> val targetPlace = target;
> @Uncounted at(targetPlace) async {
> atomic {
> otherBodies(targetPlace.id)(pl) =
> toSent;
> }
> }
> }
>
> when(otherBodies(here.id)(source.id) != null);
> //all interactions with otherBodies at other place
> val other = otherBodies(here.id)(source.id);
> for (j in 0..(other.size-1)) {
>
> val bodyJ= other(j);
>
> for (i in 0..(myBodies.size-1)) {
>
> val bodyI = myBodies(i);
> e+= 0.5 * bodyI.mass * (bodyI.velx*bodyI.velx + bodyI.vely*bodyI.vely +
> bodyI.velz*bodyI.velz);
>
> val dx: double = bodyI.posx - bodyJ.posx;
> val dy: double = bodyI.posy - bodyJ.posx;
> val dz: double = bodyI.posz - bodyJ.posx;
>
> var d2: double = dx*dx + dy*dy + dz*dz;
> //computation to update my bodies' velocity
> e-= (bodyI.mass*bodyJ.mass) / Math.sqrt(d2);
>
> }
> offer e;
> }
> target = target.next();
> source = source.prev();
> }
> }
> };
> return directEnergy;
> }
>
>
>
> static struct SumReducer implements Reducible[Double] {
> public def zero() = 0.0;
> public operator this(a:Double, b:Double) = (a + b);
> }
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2013/7/1 Josh Milthorpe <josh.miltho...@anu.edu.au>
>
>> Hi Konstantina,
>>
>> a more general version of collecting finish / offers is proposed, called
>> 'accumulator variables', but this is not yet fully implemented. Collecting
>> finish should work fine in X10 2.3.
>>
>> The Reducible interface is in x10.lang. It includes a generic SumReducer
>> struct type that you could use instead of the Double-specific one I posted.
>>
>> Can you post the code that is causing the error, along with the compile
>> error that you receive?
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Josh
>>
>> ------------------------------------------
>> Josh Milthorpe
>>
>> Postdoctoral Fellow, Research School of Computer Science
>> Australian National University, Building 108
>> Canberra, ACT 0200
>> Australia
>> Phone: + 61 (0)2 61254478
>> Mobile: + 61 (0)407 940743
>> E-mail: josh.miltho...@anu.edu.au
>> Web: http://cs.anu.edu.au/~Josh.Milthorpe/
>>
>> On 29/06/13 01:31, Konstantina Panagiotopoulou wrote:
>>
>> Hello again,
>>
>> I tried to restructure my code according to the example..
>> The problem is that I get errors with the SumReducer struct (the errors
>> point to the java generated code, and can't really make sense)
>> I checked the specification for v2.3. and found this:
>>
>> offers. The offers concept was experimental in 2.1, but was determined
>> inadequate. It has not been removed from the compiler yet, but it will be
>> soon. In
>> the meantime, traces of it are still visible in the grammar. They should
>> not be
>> used and can safely be ignored
>>
>> Also I cannot track the Reducible interface in the API.
>>
>> Is there any other more explicit way to reduce values from different
>> places?
>>
>> Thanks again,
>> Konstantina
>>
>>
>> 2013/6/27 Konstantina Panagiotopoulou <kwno...@hotmail.com>
>>
>>> Hello again,
>>>
>>> I tried to restructure my code according to the example..
>>> The problem is that I get errors with the SumReducer struct (the errors
>>> point to the java generated code, and can't really make sense)
>>> I checked the specification for v2.3. and found this:
>>>
>>> offers. The offers concept was experimental in 2.1, but was determined
>>> inadequate. It has not been removed from the compiler yet, but it will be
>>> soon. In
>>> the meantime, traces of it are still visible in the grammar. They should
>>> not be
>>> used and can safely be ignored
>>>
>>> Also I cannot track the Reducible interface in the API.
>>>
>>> Is there any other more explicit way to reduce values from different
>>> places?
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>> Konstantina
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/6/22 Vijay Saraswat <vi...@saraswat.org>
>>>
>>>> On 6/21/13 9:21 PM, Konstantina Panagiotopoulou wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a lot for the useful feedback.
>>>>> Although, I did not expect I would need such low level tuning. Looks a
>>>>> lot like MPI.
>>>>>
>>>>> X10 is a procedural programming language for distributed programming
>>>> where the notions of concurrency and distribution are made explicit.
>>>>
>>>> It is closer to MPI than, say, a more limited, declarative language
>>>> with implicit concurrency, in which the compiler determines run-time
>>>> concurrency and distribution (e.g. ZPL).
>>>>
>>>> We are very interested in such (declarative) languages as well, and
>>>> building them on top of X10, in the long term.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>>
>> Build for Windows Store.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> X10-users mailing
>> listX10-users@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>>
>> Build for Windows Store.
>>
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> X10-users mailing list
>> X10-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
Build for Windows Store.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
X10-users mailing list
X10-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/x10-users
