Re: redefining MPI_LONG_LONG_INT

[William Gropp <gropp@mcs.anl.gov>]

At 11:14 AM 7/9/2001 +0200, Alexander Supalov wrote:
>Hi everybody,
>
>It's just stricken my eye that the MPI_LONG_LONG_INT as voted in last time
>conflicts with the usual meaning of the MPI_type_INT constants. Those are
>normally used to indicate a <type,MPI_INT> pair suitable for the 
>MPI_MINLOC and
>MPI_MAXLOC reduction operations.

Note that we didn't vote *in* MPI_LONG_LONG_INT; it is part of the MPI 
1.0/1.1/1.2 standard (see page 19, line 1 of the 1.1 standard).  The vote 
was only to correct the definition of the length of MPI_LONG_LONG_INT to 
use the datatype that was defined as part of the MPI Standard.

> From this point of view, the now affirmed equivalence of the 
> MPI_LONG_LONG_INT
>and MPI_LONG_LONG (item 16 of the 1st bunch) looks fairly unfortunate, 
>doesn't
>it?

I agree that the name chosen in MPI 1 was unfortunate, but rather than 
change part of MPI 1.1, we'll need to define a different name for the 
MAXLOC and MINLOC datatypes.

Bill