[mpiwg-rma] Memory model and source code portability

William Gropp wgropp at illinois.edu
Tue Sep 30 11:43:39 CDT 2014

Not at all.  It just isn’t our place to talk about other standards.  Fortran was a slightly different case because of the discussions between members of the MPI Forum and the Fortran standards committee.  We don’t have that option with C, and I don’t think we ever will, since MPI programs are not an important part of the use of C.

If you agree with Boehm’s article in the strongest form, then you can maintain source code portability by avoiding the use of features that are not well defined in the source language - i.e., the use of shared memory.  The current straw vote addresses something at (a) is within the definitions under control of the MPI Forum and (b) allows users that are willing to do what virtually everyone currently using threads and shared memory does - rely on the compiler and processing environment to implement something other than the standard language.  But that latter case does not belong in a standard document.


On Sep 30, 2014, at 11:23 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner <rabenseifner at hlrs.de> wrote:

> For me it looks like that you give up with the important goal
> that the MPI standard should provide source code portability.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpiwg-rma/attachments/20140930/297fb989/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the mpiwg-rma mailing list