[MPI3 Fortran] Results of San Jose Forum meeting

Jeff Squyres jsquyres at cisco.com
Thu Mar 11 11:26:33 CST 2010

On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:59 AM, N.M. Maclaren wrote:

> > That being said, this is definitely an engineering tradeoff. As I
> > mentioned, the current OMPI prototype implementation has a Fortran
> > derived type that includes the corresponding OMPI C handle as a member
> > (which is a pointer). I was a bit unhappy to give this up, but Rolf
> > convinced me that the other benefits outweigh this.
> Does it still hold true, if it doesn't do what he though that it did?

(I'm stepping back and letting you Fortran guys debate all the other points)

There certainly is an elegance to having no MPI handle conversion functions between use mpi/use mpi3/mpif.h.  It would have been nice to avoid the lookup, but a) the cost really doesn't matter, and b) I think the usability issue is nice (i.e., assignment), even if none of the other benefits work out.  But I'm not tied strongly to either way.

Jeff Squyres
jsquyres at cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to:

More information about the mpiwg-fortran mailing list