> I'll pass on the question of file handles, since I don't claim to
> understand anything about the I/O chapter. But in general, adding
> dedicated routines for each object class to support attribute
> caching feels like a much better solution to me, so this is an
> approach that I would personally favor.
> Regarding datatypes, it does seem like this would be a useful bit
> of functionality, but I'm a bit concerned about the effect on
> derived datatypes. Consider the following sequence of events:
> 1) An attribute is cached on Datatype A Datatype A is used to
> create Datatype B The value of the attribute on Datatype A is
> What is the defined behavior? Perhaps there is a simple solution
> to this problem, but if so it's not yet obvious to me.
I don't see a problem if we make it so that A and B's attributes are
distinct, i.e. new datatypes always start out with no attributes and
there is no inheritance via copy functions.
Any changes to attributes on A have no effect on B and vice-versa.
We might also want to consider restricting caching to committed types
Nick Nevin email@example.com
Ohio Supercomputer Center http://www.osc.edu/lam.html