[mpi3-coll] specified in or implied by
Jesper Larsson Traeff
traff at it.neclab.eu
Tue Feb 3 03:26:13 CST 2009
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
More information about the mpiwg-coll
mailing list