RE: [pooma-dev] Testing Pooma Code Using Explicit Instantiations?

[James Crotinger]

There are definitely parts of r2 that were designed in such a way that explicit instantiation will not work - they rely on the fact that some functionality only make sense with certain types of engines, etc. For instance, MultiPatchEngine handles dynamic events, but the code that deals with these events only makes sense for patch engines that handle dynamic events. The event code is used for non-dynamic engines as well (for things like repartitioning a shared layout). The handling of dynamic events is delegated to a separate function dynamicHandler(...,WrappedInt<true>). This is called as

   dynamicHandler(...,WrappedInt<PatchEngine_t::dynamic>);

in the event handler, and the dynamicHandler(...,WrappedInt<false>) is just an empty stub. Since only the "false" version of this function is compiled for non-dynamic patch engines, this works. Explicit instantiation would attempt to compile both versions, and that would not work. The alternatives were to either make all engines support the dynamic interface, which would be a mess (and only makes sense in 1D), or to have a separate DynamicMultiPatch engine, which would mostly be a straight copy of MultiPatchEngine.

Also, there are more than a few template member functions in r2, so explicit instantiation of classes is not enough to ensure that everything compiles. (Furthermore, many of these are inline due to problems with certain compilers/debuggers - it would be very nice to move these as many of them certainly don't need to be inline, but I think CW 6.0 still has trouble debugging template member functions that are defined outside of the class body [at least the beta did].)

        Jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Nystrom [mailto:address@hidden]
> Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 11:47 AM
> To: Jeffrey Oldham
> Cc: address@hidden; Dave Nystrom
> Subject: RE: [pooma-dev] Testing Pooma Code Using Explicit
> Instantiations?
>
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Don't know how you got Nyholm but my last name is Nystrom. 
> I'm not sure
> whether Pooma 2 has a goal of being able to instantiate all
> the members of a
> class.  Perhaps Scott or Jim could comment on that>