Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
> Ok, after all the considerations, I'll try Boost, today, make some
> experiments and see if I can use it or if I'll avoid it yet.
>
> But as said by Raimond I think, the problem is been dependent of a
> rich-incredible-amazing-toolset .... but still implementing only MPI-1,
> and do not implement all the MPI functions main drawbacks of boost, but
> the set of functions implemented do not compromise the functionality, i
> don't know about the MPI-1, MPI-2 and future MPI-3 specifications, how
> this specifications implementations affect boost and the developer using
> Boost, with OpenMPI of course.
>
> Continuing if something change in the boost how can I guarantee it won't
> affect my code in the future ? It is impossible.
>
> Anyway I'll test it today and without it and choose my direction, thanks
> for all the replies, suggestions, solutions, that you all pointed to me
> I really appreciate all your help and comments about boost or not my code.
>
> Thanks and Regards.
> Vitorio.
>
Vitorio,
If there is some MPI capability that is not currently provided in
Boost.MPI, then just call it the normal MPI way. Using Boost.MPI doesn't
interfere with any use of the C bindings, even in the same function.
As for future changes, if something happens to a boost library that
you don't like, just keep using the older version. Past releases of
boost remain available after new releases arrive.
John
|
![[Flag]](../../../../../community/mirrors/flag-us.gif){kind=small}