[Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281
Douglas Miller
dougmill at us.ibm.com
Tue Jun 26 14:21:44 CDT 2012
Jeff, This is inappropriate. Especially targeting IBM like that, and on a
public mailing list. Ticket 281 has had plenty of discussions and passed
votes. This is/was a Forum decision. The fact that I agreed with it, and
volunteered to do a lot of the work, is why I am voicing my opinion on
this. We (the Forum) have said all along that anyone that has a better
design for C++ bindings should bring that forward and make a proposal.
Getting rid of the current, often considered "broken", C++ bindings is a
good way to ensure any future proposal is free to change the design.
_______________________________________________
Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development
IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401
dougmill at us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM
Jeff Hammond
<jhammond at alcf.an
l.gov> To
Sent by: Main MPI Forum mailing list
mpi-forum-bounces <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>,
@lists.mpi-forum. cc
org
Subject
Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types
06/26/2012 01:57 inaccessible after #281
PM
Please respond to
Main MPI Forum
mailing list
<mpi-forum at lists.
mpi-forum.org>
Why do you want to make it so damn hard for anyone to use MPI in C++ codes?
You don't even have to do anything to support C++ because BG-MPI is based
upon MPICH2.
Can't we just for once try to take user needs into consideration instead of
trying to reduce the workload of implementers as much as possible?
Users matter. In IBM land, they are called customers. I assure you that
some of your largest customers care a great deal about using MPI within C+
+.
You're going out of your way to try and punish your customers for using C+
+. Can't you just leave them alone? Maybe we - the customers - need to
leave IBM alone.
Jeff
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill at us.ibm.com>
wrote:
I think the issue is just that how can a standard that does not specify
how C++ fits into things (after ticket 281) then go on to define a data
type in terms of C++ types? If there is a need for a C (not C++) complex
datatype, that should be a new proposal. But that datatype should not, in
my opinion, be defined in terms of something like std::complex. If a
platform does not support something like C99 complex types, then it will
have to implement complex types and ops itself, or be incomplete.
_______________________________________________
Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development
IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401
dougmill at us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM
Inactive hide details for Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 12:31:52 PM---Jeff
Hammond <jhammond at alcf.anl.gov>Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 12:31:52
PM---Jeff Hammond <jhammond at alcf.anl.gov>
Jeff Hammond <
jhammond at alcf.anl.gov>
Sent by:
mpi-forum-bounces at lists.
mpi-forum.org To
Main MPI Forum
06/26/2012 12:21 PM mailing list <
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-
forum.org>,
cc
Please respond to
Main MPI Forum mailing list < Subject
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
Re: [Mpi-forum] C++
types inaccessible
after #281
as far as i'm concerned, these types are only valid with the C bindings
when a C++ compiler is used. does that solve it?
jeff
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Douglas Miller <dougmill at us.ibm.com>
wrote:
I've got to raise a concern here. If we start defining MPI
datatypes to be C++ types then how will an implementation support
that with only a C compiler? I thought the point of 281 was to
eradicate C++ from the standard (and start over later if C++ was to
be defined in the standard).
_______________________________________________
Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development
IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401
dougmill at us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM
Inactive hide details for Jed Brown ---06/26/2012 11:26:16 AM---Jed
Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov>Jed Brown ---06/26/2012 11:26:16
AM---Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov>
Jed Brown <
jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov>
Sent by:
mpi-forum-bounces at lists. To
mpi-forum.org
Main MPI Forum
mailing list <
06/26/2012 11:14 AM mpi-forum at lists.mpi-
forum.org>,
cc
Subject
Please respond to
Re: [Mpi-forum] C++
Main MPI Forum mailing list < types inaccessible
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org> after #281
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres at cisco.com>
wrote:
There are a few C++-specific datatypes for which it would be
worth introducing new C datatypes (e.g., MPI_CXX_COMPLEX).
It's too bad that no one realized this until now, because
this won't make the MPI-3 deadline. But it could be part of
MPI-3.1 or errata, or some such.
Two people in offline discussions have suggested that C bindings to
the std::complex types (I'm not aware of anything else that #281
will lose) might qualify as ticket 0.
_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
--
Jeff Hammond
Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
University of Chicago Computation Institute
jhammond at alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond
https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond(See attached
file: pic32424.gif)_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
--
Jeff Hammond
Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
University of Chicago Computation Institute
jhammond at alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381
http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond
https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond(See attached file:
pic08490.gif)_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120626/b96b27e8/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120626/b96b27e8/attachment-0004.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pic00728.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1255 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120626/b96b27e8/attachment-0005.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ecblank.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 45 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120626/b96b27e8/attachment-0006.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pic08490.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1255 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120626/b96b27e8/attachment-0007.gif>
More information about the mpi-forum
mailing list