[mpiwg-tools] Tools WG webex tomorrow!

[Kathryn Mohror]

>> Hello everybody and Happy Monday!
>> 
>> Please take a look at these tickets because we need to publish the final drafts *tomorrow* if they will be read in Madrid.
>> 
>> I updated 377 and 378 based on our conversations in the last call, so make sure that you like them and speak up if you don't. 
> 
> Oy, you're going to kill me,

I take back the Happy Monday :-)

> but for 377:
> 
>   "...because the tool won’t have to iterate..."
> 
> Do we use contractions in the standard?  If not, you should probably change "won't" to "will not".

Okay, I will fix this.

> For 378:
> 
>   "If any OUT parameter to MPI_T_CVAR_GET_INFO"
> 
> OUT is in the wrong font.  Same for PVAR and CATEGORY.

Do you know what the proper markup for OUT is? I looked around but didn't find an example yet. Putting in \OUT doesn't seem to do the right thing.

> 
>> We didn't go over 385,
> 
> Rather than replace the whole paragraph, is it possible to just edit the specific words that are changing?  It's somewhat difficult to read the two paragraphs and see exactly what changed...
> 
> (I know this is nit picky, but I'm going to be the one presenting this, and I'm sure someone is going to ask exactly what the difference is between the two :-) )

I will give this a try.
> 
>> 386,
> 
> What about MPI_T_PVAR_HANDLE_FREE?  That takes a (session, handle) tuple, but doesn't have the text about MPI_T_ERR_INVALID_HANDLE.

I will add this to the handle_free text. Alternatively, I could put this text right after the handle_alloc text:

For any routine that takes both handle and session arguments, if the handle argument passed in is not associated with the session argument, MPI_T_ERR_INVALID_HANDLE is returned.

Does that work for you?
> 
> Also for PVAR start, what if there are no handles associated with a session and MPI_T_PVAR_ALL_HANDLES is used?  Do we return SUCCESS or ERR_PVAR_NO_STARTSTOP?

Hm. I think this is a separate ticket, yes? And I would think returning the error code would be more helpful than success. However, I can see the other side too, that success makes sense, since nothing erroneous actually happened.

> 
>> and 387
> 
> Looks good.  :-)
> 
>> due to lack of time (I blame Fortran!) 
> 
> Long live Fortran 2028!

:-)

Kathryn

> 
> -- 
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquyres at cisco.com
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpiwg-tools mailing list
> mpiwg-tools at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools

______________________________________________________________
Kathryn Mohror, kathryn at llnl.gov, http://people.llnl.gov/mohror1
CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpiwg-tools/attachments/20130826/21581188/attachment-0001.html>