[Beowulf] programming guidence request
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Greg Lindahl lindahl at pbm.comThu Jan 22 22:40:25 PST 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] programming guidence request
- Next message: [Beowulf] programming guidence request
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:03:46AM +0500, amjad ali wrote: > (1) Which debugger would be easy and effective to use for above? print *, > (2) Which of the folliwng two ways of using arrays is more efficient > with respect to memory and function-call-overheads or other overheads: > (i) We should keep the arrays ALLOCATABLE and then > before return from the subroutines, DEALLOCATE the local arrays. > or (ii) We should keep the local arrays fix-sized as > much as we can. (Will the memory is deallaocated/freed automatically > on return from the subroutine?). In general (ii) is faster: the compiler can generate better code if it knows the size of the arrays. This is always possible with (ii) and only sometimes with (i). With (ii) the memory will be freed on return from the subroutine, with most modern compilers. With (i) the arrays will also be automagically freed on exit from the subroutine. -- greg
- Previous message: [Beowulf] programming guidence request
- Next message: [Beowulf] programming guidence request
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
