[MPI3 Fortran] [Interop-tr] [Mpi-forum] Comment on Fortran WG5 ballot N1846

Dan Nagle dannagle at verizon.net
Thu Apr 14 17:53:54 CDT 2011


On Apr 14, 2011, at 18:36 , Bill Long wrote:

> An outside-the-standard solution is to have implementations just "know" about MPI_Wait and never move code across a call.  Typically this would involve the processor inserting a hidden directive at the call site that suppresses all code motion and forces variables to memory.  Equivalent to the MPI standard mandating this for an implementation that claims to support MPI 3.0.

At the expense of appearing VILE, how would this work for an arbitrary,
user-written asynchronous routine?

>From the Fortran standard point of view, we're not designing for MPI only,
but we're using MPI as the prime example for any asynchronous routine.
This makes for a rather long list of names for the compiler to memorize.  :-)

And what's a name anyway?  We've had dummy arguments forever,
use renames for a long time, and now we have function pointers ...


Dan Nagle

More information about the mpiwg-fortran mailing list