[Mpi-21] A couple of bugs in 2.1

[Richard Graham]

Rajeev,
  Since this is a regression from MPI 2.0, I think we need to fix this.  I
do
 not see a reason why we should not be able to fix these errors before the
 final vote.  Is there someone that disagrees with this ?

Rich

On 7/21/08 10:18 PM, "Rajeev Thakur" <thakur_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Sent it to the wrong list earlier...
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mpi-21_at_[hidden] [mailto:owner-mpi-21_at_[hidden]] On
> Behalf Of Rajeev Thakur
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 9:12 PM
> To: mpi-21_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [mpi-21] A couple of bugs in 2.1
> 
> I found a couple of bugs in MPI 2.1:
> 
> * pg 332, ln 16-21: "MPI_REPLACE, like the other predefined operations, is
> defined only for the predefined MPI datatypes. Rationale: The rationale for
> this is that, for consistency, MPI_REPLACE should have the same limitations
> as the other operations. Extending it to all datatypes doesn't provide any
> real benefit."
> 
> 
> That is not true. Derived datatypes are allowed in MPI_Accumulate for the
> predefined reduction operations as explained in the paragraph just above it.
> 
> 
> * pg 237, line 1 and line 3: MPI_MAX_OBJECT should be MPI_MAX_OBJECT_NAME.
> 
> Accordingly, the Change Log needs to be updated for both these items.
> 
> The question is can these be fixed before the 2nd vote in Sept.? My
> understanding of the voting process is that the reason for having two
> separate votes in two separate meetings is to have a chance to catch such
> bugs. So it should be fixable. (Otherwise, what is the use of the 2nd vote?)
> 
> Rajeev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpi-21 mailing list
> mpi-21_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-21
> 



* 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-21/attachments/20080723/5a049155/attachment.html>