[mpi3-coll] specified in or implied by

[Jesper Larsson Traeff]

I'm also form these

Jesper

On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 12:17:06PM -0800, Adam Moody wrote:
> Several folks mentioned that this line in the NBC intro is wordy:
>    "Completion does not imply that other processes have completed or 
> even started the operation unless otherwise specified in, or implied by, 
> the description of the operation."
> I think a good solution here is to borrow from the existing collectives 
> intro (see below).
> -Adam
> 
> From p 2, lines 22-24 we have
>    "It does not indicate that other processes in the group have 
> completed or even started the operation (unless otherwise implied by in 
> the description of the operation)."
> 
> First, drop the extra preposition in this text (typo from original)
>    "implied by in"  -->  "implied by"
> 
> Second, borrow this wording for NBC on p 50, lines 7-8.
> Change:
>    "Completion does not imply that other processes have completed or 
> even started the operation unless otherwise specified in, or implied by, 
> the description of the operation."
> To:
>    "Completion does not indicate that other processes have completed or 
> even started the operation (unless otherwise implied by the description 
> of the operation.)"
> _______________________________________________
> mpi3-coll mailing list
> mpi3-coll at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-coll