Charm++ parallel programming system

[Phil Miller <mille121 AT illinois.edu>]

Actually, I think the flag you would want to use is PUP::isDeleting(),
since isPacking() may also being used in debugging or checkpointing,
in which the object may be packed but not migrated.

However, I believe a better design (if I correctly guess what you're
doing) would be to override ArrayElement::ckDestroy() in your chare
class to set a flag indicating that the impending destruction is not
due to migration, and then call the base class ckDestroy(). That is
unequivocally on a path that's only followed when the code has
explicitly asked to delete an element, and therefore not due to
migration.

On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Pritish Jetley 
<pjetley2 AT uiuc.edu>
 wrote:
> You could set a flag in the pup(PUP::er &p) call when p.isPacking() is true.
> This flag could then be examined in the destructor to tell whether the
> object in question has been packed (and presumably migrated).
>
> Pritish
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Nicolas Bock 
> <nicolasbock AT gmail.com>
>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> is it possible to tell inside a destructor whether it was called because
>> of a migration?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> nick
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> charm mailing list
>> charm AT cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/charm
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Pritish Jetley
> Doctoral Candidate, Computer Science
> University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
>
> _______________________________________________
> charm mailing list
> charm AT cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/charm
>
> _______________________________________________
> ppl mailing list
> ppl AT cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ppl
>