[Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281

[Jed Brown]

Is it intended that #281 would make std::complex inaccessible? Should there
be a MPI_CXX_COMPLEX, MPI_CXX_DOUBLE_COMPLEX, MPI_CXX_LONG_DOUBLE_COMPLEX,
and (possibly) MPI_CXX_BOOL?

Note that C99 complex is not a substitute because Microsoft does not
implement it and it has different semantics regarding numerical stability.
(Well, C99 semantics are specified and useful, std::complex stability is
not specified by any C++ standard and in practice, is not implemented in a
stable way.) This is not such a big deal for use with collectives because
user-defined MPI_Ops can be used, but only predefined types can be used
with one-sided operations, so presence of complex datatypes (or lack
thereof) is relevant to applications.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120625/669cb75d/attachment.html>