In place in/out element

[GregFreeman]

Just curious, is there any fundamental difference between using the in/out element in an in place element structure versus just using the generic node you get when crossing boundaries (I just realized I don't know if there is an official name for this node).  

 

[crossrulz]

Anymore, I doubt it.  When the In Place Element Structure was first made, it would tell the compiler to do things in place (no data copies).  I believe the compiler has gotten a lot smarter since, so there likely isn't any difference anymore.

[GregFreeman]

This was the assumption I made as well.

[shoneill]

Careful.

 

I've had cases where I want my code to be portable and have had serious issues with "smart" compilers on Real-Time systems.  I ended going back and putting in a load of IPEs to get my performance back.

 

Not all of NIs compilers for different targets are created equal.  Just because it works like a dream on one target, doesn't mean it'll do the same on all.

[ThomasGutzler]

Speaking of in place structures, is there much point cascading them (top) or is all data inside an in place structure automatically acted upon in place (bottom)?

 

[Darin]

Speaking of in place structures, is there much point cascading them (top) or is all data inside an in place structure automatically acted upon in place (bottom)?

 

As drawn, there is not much point of doing the upper version.  No need to do a meaningless index operation and incur the small but measurable performance hit of the IPES to do a simple replace.  If I am actually going to perform an index+do something+replace operation then I prefer the IPES.