[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: error checking macros with optimization


   Lisandro,

There are actually two separate concerns: optimized builds and error checking.
--with-errorchecking and --with-debugging I would like to keep them separate.

Currently --with-errorchecking has an on or off value and --with- debugging has an on or off value

If you are proposing an intermediate --with-errorchecking that simply returns the
error codes that is fine with me.

--with-errorchecking=<on,intermediate,off>

I still want by default --with-debugging=0 to leave on the full error checking. Reason:
most programmers are morons and develop code with optimization on (why? because
they are dumb as stones and no matter how many times you tell them it is a bad idea
they just ignore it, they prefer to spend hundreds of hours tracking down bugs without
debug symbols then waste 1/1000 of a second on slower code while developing.)

    Barry



On Nov 23, 2007, at 9:25 AM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:

I would to propose some changes to error checking macros for optimized builds.

1.- SETERRQXXX: define them as

#define SETERRQ[1|2|..](ierr,...)   return ierr

2.- CHKERRQ: define them as

#define CHKERRQ(ierr)  if (ierr) return ierr

For (1), it should be no performace impact. For (2), the extra check
at almost every line of PETSc source code could impact performace, but
any of you have a clear idea of how much?

--
Lisandro Dalcín
---------------
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594