Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
N
NIFTy
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Container registry
Model registry
Monitor
Service Desk
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
CI/CD analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
ift
NIFTy
Commits
b0768168
There was a problem fetching the pipeline summary.
Commit
b0768168
authored
7 years ago
by
Martin Reinecke
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
update differences document
parent
207767a2
No related branches found
No related tags found
No related merge requests found
Pipeline
#
Changes
1
Pipelines
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
differences
+16
-18
16 additions, 18 deletions
differences
with
16 additions
and
18 deletions
differences
+
16
−
18
View file @
b0768168
...
...
@@ -25,15 +25,18 @@ Significant differences between NIFTy nightly and nifty2go
However, I have not found any such situation in the current code base, so
it appears to be rare.
3) nifty2go is based on numpy arrays, not D2O objects.
For the moment, there is absolutely no MPI support.
My goal is to reintroduce this via the "data object" interface shown in the
"data_objects/" subdirectory. In principle, all operations on arrays within
NIFTy have to be carried out via calls to the data object module (or method
calls of classes defined there). By simply changing the data object module,
one could have a numpy backend or a D2O backend or something completely
different.
I'm optimistic that this can work, but don't have a demonstration yet.
3) nifty2go uses one of two different "data_object" modules for array
storage instead of D2O.
A "data_object" module consists of a class called "data_object" which
provides a subset of the numpy.ndarray interface, plus a few additional
functions for manipulating these data objects.
If no MPI support is found on the system, or if a computation is run on a
single task, nifty2go automatically loads a minimalistic "data_object"
module where the data_object class is simply identical to numpy.ndarray.
The support functions are mostly trivial as well.
If MPI is required, another module is loaded, which supports parallel
array operations; this module is in a working state, but not polished and
tuned yet.
4) Spaces no longer have a weight() method; it has been replaced by
scalar_dvol() and dvol() methods, which return the scalar volume element,
...
...
@@ -54,15 +57,6 @@ Significant differences between NIFTy nightly and nifty2go
7) In nifty2go, parallel probing should work (needs systematic testing)
8) In nifty2go, the DiagonalOperator is always constructed from a bare Field,
and its diagonal() method always returns the same bare Field.
This requires a few explicit weight() calls in other places of the code,
but it should reduce the overall amount of confusion (I hope).
In NIFTY nightly, the Fields going into and comping out of the
DiagonalOperator are treated as non-bare.
I can live with either convention, but seem to recall a remark by Torsten(?)
that the bare version is more intuitive.
9) Many default arguments have been removed in nifty2go, wherever there is no
sensible default (in my opinion). My personal impression is that this has
actually made the demos more readable, but I'm sure not everyone will agree
...
...
@@ -74,3 +68,7 @@ Significant differences between NIFTy nightly and nifty2go
11) Co-domains are now obtained directly from the corresponding Space
objects via the method "get_default_codomain()". This is implemented for
RGSpace, LMSpace, HPSpace and GLSpace.
12) Instead of inheriting from "InvertibleOperatorMixin", support for numerical
inversion is now added via the "InversionEnabler" class, which takes the
original operator as a constructor argument.
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment