[mpiwg-rma] same_op_no_op

Jim Dinan james.dinan at gmail.com
Thu Mar 13 15:28:23 CDT 2014

Because it's an info key, we can't make the relax the semantic, we can only
restrict it.  So, the most permissive semantic needs to be the default.

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Dave Goodell (dgoodell) <dgoodell at cisco.com
> wrote:

> On Mar 13, 2014, at 2:47 PM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
> > same_op_no_op_replace might not be completely SHMEM-compliant but it
> > almost certainly meets the needs of reasonable SHMEM programs.  Right
> > now, the incompatibility of REPLACE and <any reduce op> puts me in a
> > very bad place for essentially all PGAS models.
> Wouldn't you be in a perfectly fine place if we just add
> "same_op_no_op_replace" to the standard and then you modify your codes to
> use it?
> I really don't understand your insistence on changing the default
> behavior...
> -Dave
> _______________________________________________
> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpiwg-rma/attachments/20140313/df59a172/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the mpiwg-rma mailing list