[MPI3 Fortran] MPI Fortran bindings

Lionel, Steve steve.lionel at intel.com
Fri Jun 5 14:04:29 CDT 2009

INTENT doesn't help with non-contiguous buffers.  In this context, it's mostly a documentation thing, though a compiler can detect some problems if there's an intent conflict (for example, passing an INTENT(IN) argument to an INTENT(OUT) argument.


-----Original Message-----
From: mpi3-fortran-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi3-fortran-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 3:01 PM
To: MPI-3 Fortran working group
Subject: Re: [MPI3 Fortran] MPI Fortran bindings
Importance: Low

On Jun 5, 2009, at 2:55 PM, Aleksandar Donev wrote:

> On Friday 05 June 2009 11:50, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> > If you're saying that we shouldn't list the intent
> The intents are useful and fine to specify, but not that important,  
> IMO.

You're making me very confused.

I thought that people were saying that the intents *WERE* important  
for exactly some of the inout bugs that people have run into (i.e.,  
issues with non-contiguous buffers; erroneously marking them as in or  
out when they really should have been inout)...?

Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems

mpi3-fortran mailing list
mpi3-fortran at lists.mpi-forum.org

More information about the mpiwg-fortran mailing list