c689a68c5 Suppress bad deprecation warnings in MSVC
a3f23a03b Do not cast to ArrayHandleVirtual in VariantArrayHandle::CastAndCall
f6b13df51 Support coordinates of both float32 and float64
453e31404 Deprecate ArrayHandleVirtualCoordinates
be7f06bbe CoordinateSystem data is VariantArrayHandle
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Merge-request: !2177
ca91cdee4 gitlab-ci: upload doxygen docs to the public website
09973e66f gitlab-ci: use the keyfile directly
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Robert Maynard <robert.maynard@kitware.com>
Merge-request: !2183
The Microsoft compiler has this annoying and stupid behavior where if
you have a generic templated method/function and that method is
instantiated with a deprecated class, then the compiler will issue a
C4996 warning even if the calling code is suppressing that warning
(because, for example, you are implementing other deprecated code and
the use is correct). There is no way around this other than suppressing
the warnings for all uses of the templated method.
A recent change to the continuous integration setup has caused
`UnitTestArrayPortalValueReference` to fail on one platform.
The problem was that the test was doing two unsafe things with the
right-shift assignment operator. The first unsafe thing was using itself
as the operand.
```cpp
ref >>= ref;
```
This causes clang to give a "self assign overload" warning. Using a
variable as its own operand for a compute assign operation isn't great
style, but for some operations it can cause weird errors. The reason for
the warning is that for a true integer shift operation, the compiler
will recognize that the result should be 0. So, when using this on base
integer types, you will get 0. But overloads can give you something
different, so that might lead to unexpected results. Because we _are_
using an overload (for the `ArrayPortalValueReference` class), the
compiler tells us we can get potentially unexpected results.
OK. That seems like something we can safely ignore (and were ignoring
for some time). After all, the whole point of the
`ArrayPortalValueReference` operators is to behave exactly the same as
the values they wrap. That brings us to the second unsafe thing the test
was doing: using an invalid value as the right hand operation. And this
is where things get weird.
The test was specifically failing when being run on `Int32`. It was
setting the underlying value for `ref` to be `1000` to start with. So
the expression `ref >>= ref` was trying to right shift `ref` by 1000
bits. Logically, this should of course give you 0. However, shifting a
number by more bits than exist causes undefined behavior (c.f.
https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/INT34-C.+Do+not+shift+an+expression+by+a+negative+number+of+bits+or+by+greater+than+or+equal+to+the+number+of+bits+that+exist+in+the+operand).
You might not get back the expected value, and this is exactly what was
happening.
What I think happened was that the compiler determined that any valid
shift would be contained in 5 bits, so it truncated the value (1000) to
the least signifcant 5 bits (which happens to be 8). It then shifted
1000 by 8 and got the value 3 instead of 0.
The fix picks an operand number that is sure to be valid.
We are moving to deprecate `ArrayHandleVirtual`, so we are removing the
feature where `VariantArrayHandle::CastAndCall` automatically casts to
an `ArrayHandleVirtual` if possible.
The big reason to make this change now (as opposed to later when
`ArrayHandleVirtual` is deprecated) is to improve compile times.
This prevents us from having to compile an extra code path using
`ArrayHandleVirtual`.
`CoordinateSystem` differed from `Field` in that its `GetData`
method returned an `ArrayHandleVirtualCoordinates` instead of
a `VariantArrayHandle`. This is probably confusing since
`CoordianteSystem` inherits `Field` and has a pretty dramatic
difference in this behavior.
In preparation to deprecate `ArrayHandleVirtualCoordinates`, this
changes `CoordiantSystem` to be much more like `Field`. (In the
future, we may change the `CoordinateSystem` to point to a `Field`
rather than be a special `Field`.)
A method named `GetDataAsMultiplexer` has been added to
`CoordinateSystem`. This method allows you to get data from
`CoordinateSystem` as a single array type without worrying
about creating functors to handle different types and without
needing virtual methods.
Previously, if you used the `--help` option, you would get VTK-m's
initialize options and Google benchmark's options, but you would not get
the special options for the algorithms in this benchmark. Now, all the
potential options should be printed when `--help` is added to the
command line.
18b5be92d Fix issue with CUDA and ArrayHandleMultiplexer
Acked-by: Kitware Robot <kwrobot@kitware.com>
Acked-by: Robert Maynard <robert.maynard@kitware.com>
Merge-request: !2168
As a programming convenience, all `vtkm::cont::DataSet` written by
`vtkm::io::VTKDataSetWriter` were written as a structured grid. Although
technically correct, it changed the structure of the data. This meant that
if you wanted to capture data to run elsewhere, it would run as a different
data type. This was particularly frustrating if the data of that structure
was causing problems and you wanted to debug it.
Now, `VTKDataSetWriter` checks the type of the `CoordinateSystem` to
determine whether the data should be written out as `STRUCTURED_POINTS`
(i.e. a uniform grid), `RECTILINEAR_GRID`, or `STRUCTURED_GRID`
(curvilinear).
`ArrayHandle::PrepareForOutput` often has to reallocate the array to the
specified size. Previously, this allocation was not happening with the
`Token` that is passed to `PrepareForOutput`. If the `ArrayHandle` is
already attached or enqueued for that `Token`, then the allocation would
deadlock.
You can now pass a `Token` object to `Allocate`, which is what
`PrepareForOutput` does.
When you try to call the `Reduce` operation in the CUDA device adapter
with a sufficently complex interator type, you get a compile error
that says `error: cannot pass an argument with a user-provided
copy-constructor to a device-side kernel launch`.
This appears to be a bug in either nvcc or Thrust. I believe it is
related to the following reported issues:
* https://github.com/thrust/thrust/issues/928
* https://github.com/thrust/thrust/issues/1044
Work around this problem by making a special condition for calling
`Reduce` with an `ArrayHandleMultiplexer` that calls the generic
algorithm in `DeviceAdapterAlgorithmGeneral` instead of the algorithm in
Thrust.
