<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="generator" content="HTML Tidy for Windows (vers 25 March 2009), see www.w3.org">
<meta name="Generator" content="MS Exchange Server version 14.03.0157.000">
<title>Re: [mpiwg-tools] Too strict for flags in MPI_T_pvar_get_info?</title>
</head>
<body>
Hi Jeff,<br>
<br>
I see your point too. How do you propose to fix it? Make it clearer why we don't follow the same convention? Or change it to follow the rest of the standard? (The latter doesn't seem like ticket 0 to me.)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- Kathryn<br>
<br>
Sent with Good (www.good.com)<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
<b>From: </b>Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) [<a href="mailto:jsquyres@cisco.com">jsquyres@cisco.com</a>]<br>
<b>Sent: </b>Thursday, August 14, 2014 10:28 AM Pacific Standard Time<br>
<b>To: </b>MPI Tool WG<br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [mpiwg-tools] Too strict for flags in MPI_T_pvar_get_info?<br>
<br>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<p><font size="2">I think the parts about the C convention/ignoring Fortran is fine.<br>
<br>
But I think Junchao is raising the small-but-valid point that elsewhere in the doc, we say true/false for such things, but here in the tools chapter, we're saying 1/0. So I'd say that this is a valid "consistency" kind of issue.<br>
<br>
I'd further opine that this is a ticket 0 kind of change, and the chapter author should just make the change.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Aug 14, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Kathryn Mohror <kathryn@llnl.gov> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi Junchao,<br>
><br>
> Thanks as always for your sharp eyes. I think though in this case that<br>
> Nathan is correct. Since we only define a C interface for MPI_T and try to<br>
> ignore Fortran altogether, it is okay to use the C convention for true and<br>
> false.<br>
><br>
> Kathryn<br>
> _________________________________________________________________<br>
> Kathryn Mohror, kathryn@llnl.gov, <a href="http://scalability.llnl.gov/">http://scalability.llnl.gov/</a><br>
> Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA,<br>
> USA<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On 8/14/14, 9:49 AM, "Nathan Hjelm" <hjelmn@mac.com> wrote:<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> On Aug 14, 2014, at 10:35 AM, Junchao Zhang <jczhang@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> It is a minor issue. In the Standard, the description for<br>
>> int MPI_T_pvar_get_info(..., int *readonly, int *continuous, int<br>
>> *atomic)<br>
>> says:<br>
>> Upon return, the argument readonly is set to zero if the variable can<br>
>> be written or reset by the user. It is set to<br>
>> one if the variable can only be read.<br>
>> (Same thing happens to continuous and atomic.)<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> The description mandates an implementation must return 1 as TRUE, which<br>
>> does not follow C's convention. Other parts of MPI use true/false instead<br>
>> of 1/0 in description. Section 2.6.3 make it clear that true means<br>
>> non-zero.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> How does that not follow C¹s convention? C mandates that the evaluation<br>
>> of a boolean operator (<, >, !, etc) MUST evaluate to either 0 or 1.<br>
>> Returning 0/1 here makes perfect sense.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Other parts of MPI probably use true/false because fortran logicals do<br>
>> not use 0/1 for false/true.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> -Nathan Hjelm<br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> mpiwg-tools mailing list<br>
> mpiwg-tools@lists.mpi-forum.org<br>
> <a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools</a><br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Jeff Squyres<br>
jsquyres@cisco.com<br>
For corporate legal information go to: <a href="http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/">
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
mpiwg-tools mailing list<br>
mpiwg-tools@lists.mpi-forum.org<br>
<a href="http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools">http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools</a><br>
</font></p>
</body>
</html>