[Developers] should we document that CCTK_MyProc(NULL) works?

David Rideout dprideout at gmail.com
Fri Jan 12 07:29:46 CST 2007

If it is guaranteed to work then there is no need for the argument.
Perhaps you might write that most drivers behave this way, but there
is no guarantee?  And that the calling routine might check that it
returns a valid (non-negative) value?


On 1/12/07, Jonathan Thornburg <jthorn at aei.mpg.de> wrote:
> Hi,
> With all current drivers (or at least all known to the people I've
> talked to), it's legal to call CCTK_MyProc() with a NULL GH pointer,
> and doing so works (CCTK_MyProc() returns the correct result).
> IMHO this is very useful behavior.  For example, it lets code which
> doesn't have a GH still generate unique filenames for logging debug
> data.  The problem is, right now this behavior is not documented in
> the Cactus Reference Manual.
> Does anyone object to my documenting the current behavior in the
> Cactus Reference Manual?  Should we go farther and also promise
> (document) that this is guaranteed to work for any driver?
> ciao,
> --
> -- Jonathan Thornburg <jthorn at aei.mpg.de>
>    Max-Planck-Institut fuer Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut),
>    Golm, Germany, "Old Europe"     http://www.aei.mpg.de/~jthorn/home.html
>    "Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the
>     powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral."
>                                       -- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> Developers at cactuscode.org
> http://www.cactuscode.org/mailman/listinfo/developers

More information about the Developers mailing list