[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)

To: mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
From: Dries Kimpe <Dries.Kimpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:30:43 +0100
Delivered-to: mpifrm-mpi-21-outgoing@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
Delivered-to: mpifrm-mpi-21@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
In-reply-to: <20071205191905.GA25173@bx9.net>
References: <mp64xtryhGbQ.rSj4xqNx@smtp.gmail.com> <5ECAB1304A8B5B4CB3F9D6C01E4E21A2D3B655@swsmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com> <20071205191905.GA25173@bx9.net>
Reply-to: mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)

* Greg Lindahl <lindahl@xxxxxxx> [2007-12-05 11:19:07]:

> Is there any way to collect more details about such instances, so that
> we can think about possible holes in the standard?

One example of compile-time problems is the issue with SEEK_SET, SEEK_CUR,
SEEK_END and the MPI C++ bindings.

This should also be mentioned/clarified in the next revision; As far as I
know, this conflict isn't mentioned anywhere in the standard.
 
   Dries

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
  - From: William Gropp
- Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
  - From: Greg Lindahl

References:
- Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
  - From: William Yu
- RE: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
  - From: Supalov, Alexander
- Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
  - From: Greg Lindahl

Prev by Date: Re: [mpi-21] Misc items
Next by Date: Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
Previous by thread: Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
Next by thread: Re: [mpi-21] ABI (was: Call for MPI 2.2 and 3.0...)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread