Re: Canonical (External?) Data Representation

Linda Stanberry (linda@anduin.ocf.llnl.gov)
Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:28:06 -0800 (PST)

> So I would propose that we punt on this whole issue by adopting as many
> externally-define data representations as we can get our grubby little hands
> on, and make all of them optional as quality-of-implementation features.

Since this provides no portable solution, it isn't a solution. I believe
"canonical form" implies a single form, not the union of all forms. If MPI
can't define the canonical form (because it will gore someone's ox), it would
be better to define none. Maybe a palatable solution to all can eventually
be found, but rushing to adopt a plethora of forms will certainly make it
even more difficult for users to change in the future, IMHO.

Linda
lstanberry@llnl.gov