Allow multiple post interpolation callbacks #5569
Conversation
| struct AllSimpleCallbacks<tmpl::list<Callbacks...>, Box, Cache, TemporalId> | ||
| : public std::integral_constant< | ||
| bool, tmpl2::flat_all_v<is_apply_callable_v<Callbacks, Box, Cache, | ||
| TemporalId>...>> {}; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[optional] You can just inherit from tmpl2::flat_all<...> and skip the type -> bool -> type conversion, since that already inherits from an integral_constant.
As another alternative, you could use a fold expression. I don't know if anyone's compared performance between those and flat_all, but these are small lists so it shouldn't matter.
And yet another alternative: Is
AllSimpleCallbacks<callbacks, decltype(*box), decltype(*cache),
decltype(temporal_id)>sufficiently clearer than
tmpl::all<callbacks,
is_apply_callable<tmpl::_1, tmpl::pin<decltype(*box)>,
tmpl::pin<decltype(*cache)>,
tmpl::pin<decltype(temporal_id)>>to be worth the extra struct?
| template <typename Callbacks> | ||
| struct get_invalid_fill { | ||
| using type = | ||
| tmpl::find<tmpl::flatten<tmpl::transform<Callbacks, get_value<tmpl::_1>>>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is being flattened here? I think the argument is something along the lines of tmpl::list<NoSuchType, DoubleWrapper<T>>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops. I have no clue why, but when I wrote this I thought tmpl::flatten did a tmpl::filter instead. I'll just remove it
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| CREATE_HAS_STATIC_MEMBER_VARIABLE(fill_invalid_points_with) | ||
| CREATE_HAS_STATIC_MEMBER_VARIABLE_V(fill_invalid_points_with) | ||
|
|
||
| template <typename T, bool B> | ||
| struct with_value; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This namespace isn't super-specific, so name these structs something more descriptive.
| struct get_invalid_fill { | ||
| using type = | ||
| tmpl::find<tmpl::flatten<tmpl::transform<Callbacks, get_value<tmpl::_1>>>, | ||
| tt::is_a<DoubleWrapper, tmpl::_1>>; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth checking for conflicting fill requests? The code to do that might be kind of a pain.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No I don't think it's worth it because all of the current callbacks that specify this fill value set it to quiet_NaN. And yeah it was going to be a pain to make it general so I just didn't.
|
Looks good. Squash. |
knelli2
force-pushed
the
multiple_callbacks
branch
from
25fe7b3 to
6034d16
Compare
Proposed changes
Doesn't actually add any, but adds support for adding more.
For reviewers, most of the important logic changes are in
InterpolationTargetDetail.hpp. The rest is mostly just changing the name of the type alias and wrapping them in atmpl::list<>.Upgrade instructions
Code review checklist
make docto generate the documentation locally intoBUILD_DIR/docs/html.Then open
index.html.code review guide.
bugfixornew featureif appropriate.Further comments