[Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281
Douglas Miller
dougmill at us.ibm.com
Tue Jun 26 15:58:00 CDT 2012
Thank you for changing your tone.
I apologize for offending you with the word "eradicate". The term seemed to
fit the actual work being done, though, which was essentially search for
all "MPI::" and "C++" references in the MPI Standard document and remove
them.
All this being said, there are some pretty harsh accusations below. I don't
feel I deserve them, and am certain that IBM does not.
_______________________________________________
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 03:11 inaccessible after #281
PM
Please respond to
Main MPI Forum
mailing list
<mpi-forum at lists.
mpi-forum.org>
There is a huge difference between deprecating support for C++
_bindings_ and deprecating support for C++ _altogether_. The ticket
is about the C++ bindings. What Jed and I are trying to do is make
sure that the C _bindings_ allow users to work effectively within C++,
which means support std::complex<float/double/long double>. Such
support already exists in MPI 2.2, but it requires changing "::" to
"_" so that one can use them with the C interface.
It is absolutely true that the Forum wants better C++ bindings and
will kill the original ones to make this happen. However, you are the
first and only person who has suggested that the goal is to remove
support for C++ completely. I believe that your statement "I thought
the point of 281 was to eradicate C++ from the standard" is completely
wrong and made with malice aforethought. You're trying to rewrite
history to further your campaign to punish C++ programmers.
Many members of the Forum have made it clear that the goal is to
support C++ via the C bindings. That does not mean eradicating C++
from the standard. I assume that there will be text expressing the
Forum's believe that the C bindings are sufficient for C++, so clearly
there should be at least one mention of C++ in the standard.
As I said before, the right way to support C++ datatypes for the C
bindings is to restrict them to when a C++ compiler is used. That
solves your issue with not having a C++ compiler. I don't see why
you're arguing about the scenario when you don't have a C++ compiler.
Do you really have this use case as an implementer or are you just
making up silly arguments as part of your campaign of hate against
C++?
It is my understanding that your actions in regards to ticket #281 are
approved by IBM. If this ticket is not supported by IBM, then it
would make me happy to hear this.
Jeff
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill at us.ibm.com>
wrote:
>
> 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 ---06/26/2012 02:09:59 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
>
> 06/26/2012 01:57 PM
>
> Please respond to
> Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
>
>
> To
>
> Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>,
>
>
> cc
>
>
> Subject
>
> Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281
>
>
> 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
>
> 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
>
> 06/26/2012 12:21 PM
>
>
>
> Please respond to
> Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
> To
>
> Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>,
>
> cc
> Subject
>
> 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
>
> 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.mpi-forum.org
>
> 06/26/2012 11:14 AM
>
>
>
>
>
> Please respond to
>
> Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
> To
>
> Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>,
>
> cc
> Subject
>
> Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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/20120626/5fdac44b/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/20120626/5fdac44b/attachment-0003.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pic00349.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1255 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20120626/5fdac44b/attachment-0004.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/20120626/5fdac44b/attachment-0005.gif>
More information about the mpi-forum
mailing list