dolfin team mailing list archive

[A Navaei <axnavaei@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

2009/3/23 Garth N. Wells <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
> A Navaei wrote:
>>
>> The success of MTL4 based on generic meta-programming, arises the
>> question about re-visiting the efficiency of code-generation
>> approaches, including FFC. Given that FEM can particularly benefit
>> from major meta-programming characteristics, namely static
>> polymorphism and loop unrolling, MTL4 demonstrates that the
>> code-generation part can be much more efficiently replaced by inlining
>> performed at compile-time.
>>
>
> What FFC and other code generators do is a form of metaprogramming, so I
> don't see what point you're trying to make.

As mentioned above, we are talking about compile-time implicit inline
code generation which is opposed to explicit code generation as done
by FFC -- refer to MTL publications.


-Ali

>
> Garth
>
>> Without having a concrete meta-programming implementation, it may be
>> impossible to predict how much performance one would gain compared to
>> FFC. However, MTL4 has been reported to be many times faster than
>> code-generation means such as ATLAS.
>>
>> Based on this, are there any specific benefits in FFC code-generation
>> which may not be covered by meta-programming?
>>
>>
>> -Ali
>> _______________________________________________
>> DOLFIN-dev mailing list
>> DOLFIN-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
>
>
>