Re: alternate simplified proposal #1 (fwd)
William C. Saphir (wcs@nas.nasa.gov)
Tue, 11 Jun 1996 12:31:44 -0700
On Jun 11, 1:11pm, Leslie Hart (NOAA/FSL) wrote:
> Subject: Re: alternate simplified proposal #1 (fwd)
>
> I think the utility functions will simplify things for
> both Fortran and C users (I think especially Fortran). I
> generally like the idea, but I would prefer to see it cast
> as a putenv/getenv style.
>
>
> MPI_Info_put (INOUT InfoHandle, IN ElementName, IN ElementValue)
> MPI_Info_get (INOUT InfoHandle, IN ElementName, OUT ElementValue, OUT Flag)
>
> C Bindings:
> MPI_Info_create(MPI_Info *)
> MPI_Info_put(MPI_Info, char *, char *)
> MPI_Info_get(MPI_Info, char *, char *, int *)
> MPI_Info_dup(MPI_Info, MPI_Info *)
> MPI_Info_delete(MPI_Info *)
>
> I think some things like this showed up in the dynamic chapter,
> but were not expressed like getenv/putenv.
These are exactly the routines that were voted in at the last
meeting, except for the flag argument to MPI_Info_get, which
seems like a good addition.
I will send out a summary of the meeting decisions later
today, since this is causing some confusion.
Bill