balaji at anl.gov
Thu Mar 13 14:52:02 CDT 2014
On Mar 13, 2014, at 2:47 PM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
> If we thought it was a mistake in MPI-2 to disallow it, wouldn't we
> have tried to relax it in MPI-3? Brian had commented before that we
> might have been confused when defining same_op_no_op and really meant
> same_op_no_op_replace, which is a perfectly reasonable default
It was not disallowed in MPI-2. I meant that we made a mistake in MPI-3 to disallow it since that is not backward compatible.
IMO, we should have kept the same semantics as MPI-2, but allowed the user to relax it with info arguments.
More information about the mpiwg-rma