I do not know where you found get_file_size and get_file_extent.
In order to be more consistent, I would recommend to use for all
get/set functions related to I/O the format:
get_file_xxx and set_file_xxx
Therefore, we would get the following set:
get_file_amode
get_file_atomicity
set_file_atomicity
get_file_comm
get_file_info
set_file_info
get_file_position
get_file_position_shared
get_file_size
get_file_view
set_file_view
Jean-Pierre
---------- Forwarding Original Note --------
To: mpi-io @ mcs.anl.gov
cc:
From: taylor @ Think.COM
Date: 10/23/96 09:32:38 AM AST
Subject: mpi i/o naming inconsistency
Security:
--0__=xsjfHDxSGybF11NcSO5kSlfHoH4T4BgAf1FnZaot2OIHoGrn9vfQAYnI
If we look at the file-control replacements:
get-view
set-view
get-size
get-file-size
get-file-extent
get-position
get-position-shared
file-get-amode
file-get-comm
get-file-info
set-file-info
get-atomicity
set-atomicity
There are some naming inconsistencies. Some have 'file' as part of the
name, others don't. Some are file-get-... others are get-file-....
If there is some reasoning behind the names, I'd like to see it spelled
out in the document; if there is none, then can we pick some conventions
and clean it up?
I think the names would be easier to remember if there was some
consistency.
Thanks.
--0__=xsjfHDxSGybF11NcSO5kSlfHoH4T4BgAf1FnZaot2OIHoGrn9vfQAYnI--