[MPI3 Fortran] Agenda for MPI3 Fortran Working group next week

Jeff Squyres jsquyres at cisco.com
Thu Jun 4 12:07:39 CDT 2009

On Jun 4, 2009, at 12:59 PM, N.M. Maclaren wrote:

> >One of the decisions the MPI group needs to make is whether using  
> an MPI
> >module is required for the new interface.   If the answer is no, then
> >the space of options is reduced quite a bit.  I don't get a vote,  
> but if
> >I did, I would favor a requirement that any program unit that uses  
> >facilities has access to the MPI module.
> I don't, either, and I quite agree.

I'd guess that we're fine with a module (can't speak for everyone, of  
course, but the temperature had been fairly favorable to a module in  
prior meetings).

We already have "use mpi"; I think that it's an open question as to  
whether this will be "use mpi3" (or some other name) for the new  
interface.  I'm thinking that it'll have to be something new (e.g.,  
"mpi3") because we want to change some of the existing interfaces.

I think this is something we need to talk about in Menlo Park next week:

- what to do with mpif.h (I think we should deprecate it -- MPI  
implementations can choose to keep supporting it for legacy apps/ 
customers, of course)
- what to do with "use mpi" (deprecate?)
- what to do with this new interface ("use mpi3"?)

Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems

More information about the mpiwg-fortran mailing list