Getting the number of components (or the number of flattened components)
from an `ArrayHandle` is usually trivial. However, if the `ArrayHandle` is
special in that the number of components is specified at runtime, then it
becomes much more difficult to determine.
Getting the number of components is most important when extracting
component arrays (or reconstructions using component arrays) with
`UnknownArrayHandle`. Previously, `UnknownArrayHandle` used a hack to get
the number of components, which mostly worked but broke down when wrapping
a runtime array inside another array such as `ArrayHandleView`.
To prevent this issue, the ability to get the number of components has been
added to `ArrayHandle` proper. All `Storage` objects for `ArrayHandle`s now
need a method named `GetNumberOfComponentsFlat`. The implementation of this
method is usually trivial. The `ArrayHandle` template now also provides a
`GetNumberOfComponentsFlat` method that gets this information from the
`Storage`. This provides an easy access point for the `UnknownArrayHandle`
to pull this information.
StorageType is public in vtkm::cont::ArrayHandle, but some subclasses
re-declare it as private. Having it public provides a convenient way to
get the storage type of an ArrayHandle, otherwise it is quite verbose.
Addresses: #314
There are some special functions/methods that take as an argument a
function-like object and then call that function with some arguments.
There are some instances where a templated function was passed given the
appropriate template. Even though there is a specific function, this
gets passed as a function pointer and calling a function pointer on some
devices is a no-no.
Replace these function arguments with lambdas, which are constructed as
unnamed functor objects.
With the major revision 2.0 of VTK-m, many items previously marked as
deprecated were removed. If updating to a new version of VTK-m, it is
recommended to first update to VTK-m 1.9, which will include the deprecated
features but provide warnings (with the right compiler) that will point to
the replacement code. Once the deprecations have been fixed, updating to
2.0 should be smoother.
Previously, the number of buffers held by an `ArrayHandle` had to be
determined statically at compile time by the storage. Most of the time
this is fine. However, there are some exceptions where the number of
buffers need to be selected at runtime. For example, the
`ArrayHandleRecombineVec` does not specify the number of components it
uses, and it needed a hack where it stored buffers in the metadata of
another buffer, which is bad.
This change allows the number of buffers to vary at runtime (at least at
construction). The buffers were already managed in a `std::vector`. It
now no longer forces the vector to be a specific size.
`GetNumberOfBuffers` was removed from the `Storage`. Instead, if the
number of buffers was not specified at construction, an allocation of
size 0 is done to create default buffers.
The biggest change is to the interface of the storage object methods,
which now take `std::vector` instead of pointers to `Buffer` objects.
This adds a little hastle in having to copy subsets of this `vector`
when a storage object has multiple sub-arrays. But it does simplify some
of the templating.
In pretty much any practical circumstance, whenusing `ListAll` or
`ListAny`, you have a list of types on which you run some sort of
predicate on each item in the list to determine whether any or all of
the items match the predicate. To make this easier, add a second
argument to `ListAll` and `ListAny` to provide a predicate that will
automatically be added.
If no predicate is given, then the operation is run directly on the
list. This is implemented by just using an identity operation.
Many arrays decorate other arrays but still allow an efficient component
extraction. However, the component can only be extracted if it can be
efficiently extracted from the array being decorated. In this case, the
array reported that it could efficiently extract even though it could
not.
Fixed this by having the `ArrayExtractComponentImpl` classes inherit
from the respective superclass. This will in turn inhert the
`ArrayExtractComponentImplInefficient` if it is the base class.
Rather than require `ArrayCopy` to create special versions of copy for
all arrays, use a precompiled versions. This should speed up compiles,
reduce the amount of code being generated, and require the device
compiler on fewer source files.
There are some cases where you still need to copy arrays that are not
well supported by the precompiled versions in `ArrayCopy`. (It will
always work, but the fallback is very slow.) In this case, you will want
to switch over to `ArrayCopyDevice`, which has the old behavior.
What was previously declared as `ArrayHandleNewStyle` is now just the
implementation of `ArrayHandle`. The old implementation of `ArrayHandle`
has been moved to `ArrayHandleDeprecated`, and `ArrayHandle`s still
using this implementation must declare `VTKM_ARRAY_HANDLE_DEPRECATED` to
use it.
`ArrayExtractComponent` allows you to get a component of an array.
Unlike `ArrayHandleExtractComponent`, the type you get is always the
same: an `ArrayHandleStride`. This way, you can get an array that
contains the data of an extracted component with less templating and
potentially dramatically reduce the amount of code generated (although
some runtime integer arithmetic is added).
When `ArrayHandleCompositeVector` has only 1 component, it is supposed
to have a special template that uses the base value type rather than a
`Vec` of that type. However, the `Storage` with the value type was
missing. I'm not sure how we weren't getting compile errors before, but
moving to the new buffer arrays seems to bring about the expected error.
As we remove more and more virtual methods from VTK-m, I expect several
users will be interested in completely removing them from the build for
several reasons.
1. They may be compiling for hardware that does not support virtual
methods.
2. They may need to compile for CUDA but need shared libraries.
3. It should go a bit faster.
To enable this, a CMake option named `VTKm_NO_DEPRECATED_VIRTUAL` is
added. It defaults to `OFF`. But when it is `ON`, none of the code that
both uses virtuals and is deprecated will be built.
Currently, only `ArrayHandleVirtual` is deprecated, so the rest of the
virtual classes will still be built. As we move forward, more will be
removed until all virtual method functionality is removed.
The old version of ExecutionObject (that only takes a device) is still
supported, but you will get a deprecated warning if that is what is
defined.
Supporing this also included sending vtkm::cont::Token through the
vtkm::cont::arg::Transport mechanism, which was a change that propogated
through a lot of code.
7e01edb01 Ensure that Portal::Set isn't defined for read-only portals.
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Robert Maynard <robert.maynard@kitware.com>
Merge-request: !1848
This patch removes (or conditionally removes) the Set method from
portals that are read-only so that IsWritableArrayHandle will work as
expected. The ArrayPortal doxygen has been updated to reflect this.
The remaining exceptions are `ArrayPortalVirtual` and
`ArrayPortalMultiplexer`, since their mutability cannot be determined at
compile time.
- Use tao::tuple instead of FunctionInterface to hold array/portal
collections.
- Type signatures are simplified. Now just use:
- ArrayHandleCompositeVector<ArrayT1, ArrayT2, ...>
- make_ArrayHandleCompositeVector(array1, array2, ...)
instead of relying on helper structs to determine types.
- No longer support component selection from an input array. All
input arrays must have the same ValueType (See ArrayHandleSwizzle
and ArrayHandleExtractComponent as the replacements for these
usecases.
Sandia National Laboratories recently changed management from the
Sandia Corporation to the National Technology & Engineering Solutions
of Sandia, LLC (NTESS). The copyright statements need to be updated
accordingly.
The current design for ArrayPortalVirtual makes it a requirement for all
array portals (that it wraps) to have Set defined. Thus, make sure Set is
defined for all ArrayPortal. Where Set is invalid, an assert is thrown if
something calls it at runtime.
Class that need to be passed across dynamic library boundaries such as
DynamicArrayHandle need to be properly export. One of 'tricks' of this
is that templated classes such as PolymorphicArrayHandleContainer need
the Type and Storage types to have public visibility.
This makes sure that all vtkm storage tags have public visibility so
in the future we can transfer dynamic array handles across libraries.
Change the VTKM_CONT_EXPORT to VTKM_CONT. (Likewise for EXEC and
EXEC_CONT.) Remove the inline from these macros so that they can be
applied to everything, including implementations in a library.
Because inline is not declared in these modifies, you have to add the
keyword to functions and methods where the implementation is not inlined
in the class.
These asserts are consolidated into the unified Assert.h. Also made some
minor edits to add asserts where appropriate and a little bit of
reconfiguring as found.
Previously the make_ArrayHandleCompositeVector template was declared in
such a way that if you passed it a fancy array handle, it would change
the type to a base ArrayHandle with a fancy storage. This was
inconsistent with types generated from ArrayHandleCompositeVectorType
when using the same fancy array handle types. This change makes that
more consistent.
Previously, the ArrayHandleCompositeVector had a separate implementation
of ArrayPortal for the control and execution environments. Because I was
lazy when I implemented it, the control version did not support Get.
Since originally implementing this class, VTK-m now allows defining
methods that are declared as working in both control and execution
environments (VTKM_EXEC_CONT_EXPORT) but only work in one or the other
depending on methods of templated subclasses they call. Thus, solve this
problem by simply removing the control version of the portal and use the
same portal for both.
The ArrayHandle classes all exclusively work in the control environment.
However, CUDA likes to add __device__ to constructors, destructors, and
assignment operators it automatically adds. This in turn causes warnings
about the __device__ function using host-only classes (like
boost::shared_ptr). Solve this problem by adding explicit methods for
all of these.
Implemented this by wrapping up all these default objects in a macro.
This also solved the problem of other constructors that are necessary
for array handles such as a constructor that takes the base array
handle.
Under CUDA, the default constructors and destructors created are exported
as __host__ and __device__, which causes problems because they used a boost
pointer that only works on the host. The explicit copy constructors and
destructors do the same thing as the default ones except declared to only
work on the host.
This is to be used in place of BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT so that we can
control its implementation.
The implementation is designed to fix the issue where the latest XCode
clang compiler gives a warning about a unused typedefs when the boost
static assert is used within a function. (This warning also happens when
using the C++11 static_assert keyword.) You can suppress this warning
with _Pragma commands, but _Pragma commands inside a block is not
supported in GCC. The implementation of VTKM_STATIC_ASSERT handles all
current cases.
