Re: [pooma-dev] CompressibleBrickView's makeOwnCopy

[Jeffrey Oldham]

On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:40:44AM -0600, Scott Haney wrote:
> Hi Jeffrey,
> 
> Whoa, let's wait a second here.
> 
> If you remove this code, can you explicitly instantiate View1 as in your 
> little example? Jim's point is a good one, but removing it might not be 
> the right answer either. To support explicit instantiation, we might 
> want to have the function, but simply have a PAssert in the body in case 
> it ever gets called.

    #include "Pooma/NewFields.h"

    #define T1 NoGeometry<(int)3>
    #define T2 int
    #define T3 CompressibleBrick
    #define T4 Interval<(int)3>
    template class Field<T1,T2,T3>;
    template class View1<Field<T1,T2,T3>,T4>;

still compiles.  Perhaps we should wait reversing the patch until I
finish modifying the code to eliminate the need for explicitly
instantiating 'class Field'.  I made some progress, but I also made a
mistake somewhere.

Jeffrey D. Oldham
address@hidden

> On Tuesday, May 15, 2001, at 08:33 AM, Jeffrey Oldham wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 07:22:06AM -0600, James Crotinger wrote:
> >>
> >>> (Engine<Dim,T,CompressibleBrickView>::makeOwnCopy()): New
> >>> declaration.
> >>
> >>
> >> "View" engines aren't supposed to have makeOwnCopy(). I'm not exactly 
> >> sure
> >> what this would mean in general since, in a sense, they don't own 
> >> their data
> >> in the first place.
> >
> > OK to commit the following patch to eliminate CompressibleBrickView's
> > makeOwnCopy()?  Will the resulting code still solve Dave Nystrom's
> > makeOwnCopy() problem?
> >
> > 2001-05-15  Jeffrey D. Oldham  <address@hidden>
> >
> >         * Engine/CompressibleBrick.cpp
> >         (Engine<Dim,T,CompressibleBrickView>::makeOwnCopy()): Remove 
> > this
> >     incorrectly introduced function.
> >         * Engine/CompressibleBrick.h
> >     (Engine<Dim,T,CompressibleBrickView>::makeOwnCopy()): Likewise.
> >
> > Tested on   sequential Linux gcc 3.0 by compiling library
> > Approved by ???Jim Crotinger???