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.
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.
ArrayHandles in DAX have a CopyInto function which allows the user to copy an array handle's data into a compatible STL type iterator. Originally this was fairly straight forward to implement since array handles in DAX are templated on the DeviceAdapterTag. In contrast, VTKm array handles use a polymorphic ArrayHandleExecutionManager under the hood allowing a single array handle to interface with multiple devices at runtime. To achieve this virtual functions are used. This makes implementing the CopyInto function difficult since it is templated on the IteratorType and virtual functions cannot be templated.
To work around this, I've implemented a concrete templated CopyInto function in the class derived from ArrayHandleExecutionManagerBase. In the ArrayHandle class, CopyInto dynamically casts the base class into the derived class, then calls the CopyInto function defined in the derived class.
The drawback to this approach is that, should the user define their own class that inherits from ArrayHandleExectionManagerBase, they are not forced to implement the CopyInto function, unlike the other virtual functions.
Previously ArrayTransfer and ArrayManagerExecution received a reference
to a Storage class in their constructor and held the reference as an
ivar. In retrospect, this is just asking for trouble. First, it is way
too easy to pass by value when you mean to pass by reference. Second, if
there ever is a bug where the Storage goes out of scope before the
classes holding a reference, it is that much harder to debug.
This includes changing methods like LoadDataForInput to PrepareForInput.
It also changed the interface a bit to save a reference to the storage
object. (Maybe it would be better to save a pointer?) These changes also
extend up to the ArrayManagerExecution class, so it can effect device
adapter implementations.
This API change effects both ArrayTransfer and ArrayManagerExecution.
This is in preparation for a future change to make the API more
consistent with ArrayHandle.
The UserPortal in ArrayHandle was used to copy a pointer the user
created into an ArrayHandle to use in VTK-m algorithms. However, this is
only really valid for a basic storage, so the functionality has been
moved there, and you have to construct an ArrayHandle with a storage
instead of an array portal.
After a talk with Robert Maynard, we decided to change the name
ArrayContainerControl to Storage. There are several reasons for this
change.
1. The name ArrayContainerControl is unwieldy. It is long, hard for
humans to parse, and makes for long lines and wraparound. It is also
hard to distinguish from other names like ArrayHandleFoo and
ArrayExecutionManager.
2. The word container is getting overloaded. For example, there is a
SimplePolymorphicContainer. Container is being used for an object that
literally acts like a container for data. This class really manages
data.
3. The data does not necessarily have to be on the control side.
Implicit containers store the data nowhere. Derivative containers might
have all the real data on the execution side. It is possible in the
future to have storage on the execution environment instead of the
control (think interfacing with a simulator on the GPU).
Storage is not a perfect word (what does implicit storage really mean?),
but its the best English word we came up with.
