Hmm. So the public function in BMA requires a dataset, but the private functions you're calling, under MPI, don't have such a requirement?Yes, that is exactly my case.
Yeah, I agree at 100%.
Then I suppose it's a feasible hack to drop the dataset requirement from the package specification, but that doesn't really seem right to me: a package should, ideally, honestly state whether it needs a dataset or not.
I've just added in git, an option --send-data for the mpi-block command, which works in the same sort of way as under "foreign" (except that in this case we can use gretl's native gdt/gdtb formats to send the data to gretlmpi). However, if you don't really need to send the dataset this may just waste CPU cycles in your case.I see.
Seems to me that you're trying to use gretl's "mpi" block in a way that was not intended. That leaves open the question: even if it was not originally intended, should it nonetheless be supported, somehow? Possibly, but I think it would be cleaner (if you want to support both MPI-enabled gretl and basic gretl) if you were to branch the package code early on, conditional on presence of MPI support: if so, do this (go into MPI mode right away); if not, do the other.Let me explain my idea of incorporating MPI into BMA (and possibly into other packages).
Allin
_______________________________________________ Gretl-devel mailing list Gretl-devel@lists.wfu.edu http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-devel
-- Marcin Błażejowski