Threading

[ThimotheeV]

treepplr v0.15
Adding threading in tp_run see bellow
Base on PR 12

---

Suggest bullets to add to the changelog below (under ### headings), if any. A PR that has a user-visible change should have a bullet, even if it's, e.g., just a bugfix.

TreePPL Release Notes

Added

• treepplr v0.15 : tp_run(n_runs) to run multiple sweeps/runs
• treepplr v0.15 : tp_run(n_processes) to run MCMC or SMC in parallel using n cores
• treepplr v0.15 : tp_compile_methods() to find available methods

Changed

• treepplr v0.15 : Updated the documentation

Deprecated

Removed

Fixed

Security

[ronquist]

Having difficulties understanding the update to the changelog:

"tp_run(n_runs) to run multiples sweep/chains" -> drop the s in "multiples", it should be "multiple". Then change "sweep/chains" to "sweeps/chains". This assumes that we use the sweeps/chains terminology elsewhere in the documentation for multiple runs of SMC and MCMC, respectively, which I am uncertain whether that is the case. Note that "chains" may be less than ideal here as it may refer to multiple heated chains coupled through Pigeons as part of the same analysis/run, so it would be better to call it something else, like runs. As long as the terms used here are consistent with the rest of the documentation and the compiler settings, I am fine.

"tp_run(n_runs) to run multiples processus" -> drop the s in "multiples". "processus" is not English, maybe you mean "processes". Does that support running MCMC or SMC in parallel using multiple cores? That would be great. But is it really the same name for the command and argument if so?

"Update the documentation" -> To be nitpicky, it should probably be "Updated the documentation" to fit the past tense used in the header. Or alternatively, "Update of the documentation" if the intention was to use the noun "update".

"tp_compile_methods" -> this name suggests you only get info on the "methods" options of the compiler. Why not give the user all compile options, or maybe that is a separate command? If this command gives all compile options, why not call it "tp_compile_options"?

[ThimotheeV]

@ronquist I have update the Release Notes according to your comments (sorry I haven't check proof myself when I write the comment).
We have indeed tp_compile_options and tp_runtime_options (see PR 12).