[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: Greg Lindahl <lindahl@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:57:11 -0800
Delivered-to: mpifrm-mpi-21-outgoing@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
Delivered-to: mpifrm-mpi-21@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
In-reply-to: <20071206103043.GC10990@mhdmobile.lan>
References: <mp64xtryhGbQ.rSj4xqNx@smtp.gmail.com> <5ECAB1304A8B5B4CB3F9D6C01E4E21A2D3B655@swsmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com> <20071205191905.GA25173@bx9.net> <20071206103043.GC10990@mhdmobile.lan>
Reply-to: mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-mpi-21@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 11:30:43AM +0100, Dries Kimpe wrote:

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

Is this a place where MPI implementations are different? Yes, a bug in
the standard, but no, not a source of unportability when moving to a
different MPI implementation.

-- greg

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: Dries Kimpe

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

Prev by Date: Re: [mpi-21] MPI 2.0 review
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