Probably the least damaging thing to do now is to make them MPI_Fints - this (probably) will have no affect in any current implementation, and is consistent with most of the text. I agree that it would be good to deprecate these values, even if we don't replace them in 2.2 . Bill On Jan 27, 2009, at 5:08 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jan 27, 2009, at 5:56 PM, William Gropp wrote:
Eek! Not for 2.2 ! Maybe a historical advice to users ....
There are two issues:
1. The current text about the C type for predefined attributes is erroneous.
p487:46 through 488-3 says that predefined attributes were set by "a Fortran call" (it doesn't say which Fortran call), but then says the result in C is of type int. There is no Fortran attribute call that sets an attribute value that is exactly equivalent to a C int. That's why MPI-2 created MPI_Fint, right?
So I think that we must do *something* about this issue.
2. Deprecating the old attribute names now (as you suggested) is not a Bad Thing. Right now, we have a discontinuity of deprecations: some functions are deprecated, but values that are supposedly set by those functions are *not* deprecated. If we deprecate those values now and provide replacements, it opens the door in MPI-3 (or later) to actually whack them from the spec and only use the new names. Specifically: deprecating the old names doesn't mean that we have to break user apps for MPI-2.2.
-- Jeff Squyres Cisco Systems
_______________________________________________ mpi-22 mailing list mpi-22_at_[hidden] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-22
William Gropp Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign