-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 113
[oneDPL] Add memory parallel range algorithms #631
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[oneDPL] Add memory parallel range algorithms #631
Conversation
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
0dc211c
to
b69247a
Compare
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall, looking at the new set of Parallel Range Algorithms I am pretty sure that either referring to the C++ working draft or adding execution-policy
concept to our spec would simplify the signatures quite significantly...
using /*projected-value-type*/ = std::remove_cvref_t<std::invoke_result_t<Proj&, std::iter_value_t<I>&>>; | ||
// C++20 analogue of nothrow-random-access-range proposed for C++26 in P3179R9; exposition only | ||
template <typename R> | ||
concept nothrow-random-access-range = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why did we decide to "copy" this concept instead of nothrow-sized-random-access-range
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think for consistency with the other signatures, where sized_range
comes under requires
clauses.
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
We cannot reuse |
Co-authored-by: Dan Hoeflinger <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Dan Hoeflinger <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alexey Kukanov <[email protected]>
ee35282
to
5d6a0d2
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It looks good to me now.
source/elements/oneDPL/source/parallel_api/parallel_range_api.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Alexey Kukanov <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Adding
uninitialized_default_construct
,uninitialized_value_construct
,uninitialized_move
,uninitialized_copy
,uninitialized_fill
anddestroy
parallel range algorithms into oneDPL specification.