<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div apple-content-edited="true"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>On Mar 26, 2013, at 6:38 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:</div></div></span></span></div><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Mar 25, 2013, at 2:35 PM, Bill Long <<a href="mailto:longb@cray.com">longb@cray.com</a>> wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">I'm strongly in favor of option 3. It is the only option that allows<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">the possibility of underscore name mangling disappearing in the future.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"> I think most (if not all) MPI Fortran implementations will eventually<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">evolve to thin wrappers calling the C API. <br></blockquote></blockquote><br>Remember that Open MPI can never do this approach since our C handles != Fortran handles, and Fortran wrappers will not be able to reach back into the back-end C MPI objects (at least, not without a truckload of extra interop code -- the Fortran bindings layer would have to gain an understanding of the back-end MPI C objects, and that seems like a terrible idea).<br><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#007b1b"><br></font></div></blockquote></div><br><div>I'm a hacker at heart and so I'm not as pessimistic as Jeff is. I'll have a conversation with Jeff see if I can convince him.</div><div><br></div><div>This may be beyond the scope of an errata but I don't want to close off this possibility. Otherwise the MPI standard will still REQUIRE implementations to go OUTSIDE of the Fortran standard. This to me is a big deal and was one of the two big reasons in my opinion why we did MPI-3 for Fortran in the first place (the other was type safety). I really hate to go to all the work we did and then give up on an MPI standard that is out of compliance with language standards.</div><div><br></div><div><div>Craig Rasmussen</div><div>CAS Scientific Programmer</div><div><a href="mailto:rasmus@cas.uoregon.edu">rasmus@cas.uoregon.edu</a></div></div><div><br></div></body></html>