June 2012 - mpi-forum - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229
by Darius Buntinas 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

The approved branch fails to build. It looks like maybe mpireport.tex was corrupted in the r1191 ? -d On Jun 27, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Richard Graham wrote: > Rolf/All, > The approved branch is only for chapter authors to write to - this is where we take the draft-standard drops. Since the change is large, it does not make sense to back out these changes, and have the chapter committees put them in after going over them and verifying the. Instead, if each chapter committed could let me know that they have looked over the changes, and are OK with them, that will be best. I would like to put out a draft-standard by early next week with all the changes that people have made, so the folks can start to look over it before the next meeting. PLEASE let me know when you have looked over the changes. > > Thanks, > Rich > > -----Original Message----- > From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rolf Rabenseifner > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:40 AM > To: Main MPI Forum mailing list > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 > > Dear all chapter-authors, > > the merge of existing approved/MPI-3.0/* (svn release 1189) and the whole Fortran ticket #229 is completed and checked in as (1190,) 1191, (and 1192). > > Please "svn update" you whole approved/MPI-3.0/ to receive all the changed files. > > With this "my write-lock" on the whole source is released now. > > Best regards > Rolf > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de> >> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:04:47 PM >> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 >> >> I hope, that all chapter authors do not edit the tex files today and >> tomorrow. Otherwise they can do it again. >> or merge the hughes Fortran changes into their changes. >> >> I'll come back with the results tomorrow. >> >> Rolf >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> >>> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" >>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:59:32 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 >>> >>> Thanks Rolf! >>> >>> On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:57 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all chapter-authors, >>>> >>>> all chapters are touched by the new Fortran interface #229. >>>> >>>> I just started to include all ticket #229 into all .tex files >>>> based on current svn/mpi-forum-docs/approved/MPI-3.0/ SNV release >>>> 1189 >>>> >>>> I'll try to give you the modified .tex for your chapter. >>>> Of course, I'll not update this in the SVN because you only are >>>> allowed to commit (check in) new tex files. >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> Rolf > > -- > Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] anonymous SVN of MPI standard LaTeX?
by Jeff Hammond 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Indeed, I understand the potential risks associated with a public repo. Perhaps the website could merely state that read-only access is available upon request. That would allow them to be screened, but it would make it clear that the Forum is open to enabling new proposals from people outside of the inner circle. Jeff On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: > Thanks for following up on this, Jeff. > > The Forum has decided not to make the SVN publicly available because it doesn't want half-baked, incomplete versions of the standard floating around the internet (we've had this discussion many times and this has always been the answer; let's not re-open this particular discussion right now). > > I'll send you the generic read-only credentials and SVN URL off-list. > > > On Jun 27, 2012, at 9:13 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > >> I would like to write a proposal to the MPI Forum myself instead of >> wasting everyone's time by ranting on this list or by pestering Pavan >> or Torsten to write something that encapsulates my ideas. >> >> I have a Trac account but cannot find the MPI standard LaTeX source in >> the section marked "Browse Source". ï¿½I know that some people are about >> to get LaTeX, and that this seems to be the way that all successful >> proposals are generated, so can everyone - not just me - get access >> via anonymous SVN? >> >> If I've just failed to find the link to anonymous SVN of the MPI >> standard, can you remind me? ï¿½I think that many others would be >> interested as well, since it doesn't appear that this info is readily >> available on the various MPI Forum websites. >> >> It really doesn't work to require me to copy and paste from the PDF >> since the few times that I've done that the formatting is all sorts of >> screwed up and it takes a good bit of time just to make it readable >> text. ï¿½If I were to make a proposal involving more than a few >> sentences, starting from the PDF would be a deal-breaker. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jeff >> >> -- >> Jeff Hammond >> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility >> University of Chicago Computation Institute >> jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond >> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] anonymous SVN of MPI standard LaTeX?
by Jeff Squyres 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Thanks for following up on this, Jeff. The Forum has decided not to make the SVN publicly available because it doesn't want half-baked, incomplete versions of the standard floating around the internet (we've had this discussion many times and this has always been the answer; let's not re-open this particular discussion right now). I'll send you the generic read-only credentials and SVN URL off-list. On Jun 27, 2012, at 9:13 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > I would like to write a proposal to the MPI Forum myself instead of > wasting everyone's time by ranting on this list or by pestering Pavan > or Torsten to write something that encapsulates my ideas. > > I have a Trac account but cannot find the MPI standard LaTeX source in > the section marked "Browse Source". I know that some people are about > to get LaTeX, and that this seems to be the way that all successful > proposals are generated, so can everyone - not just me - get access > via anonymous SVN? > > If I've just failed to find the link to anonymous SVN of the MPI > standard, can you remind me? I think that many others would be > interested as well, since it doesn't appear that this info is readily > available on the various MPI Forum websites. > > It really doesn't work to require me to copy and paste from the PDF > since the few times that I've done that the formatting is all sorts of > screwed up and it takes a good bit of time just to make it readable > text. If I were to make a proposal involving more than a few > sentences, starting from the PDF would be a deal-breaker. > > Thanks, > > Jeff > > -- > Jeff Hammond > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > University of Chicago Computation Institute > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229
by Richard Graham 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Rolf/All, The approved branch is only for chapter authors to write to - this is where we take the draft-standard drops. Since the change is large, it does not make sense to back out these changes, and have the chapter committees put them in after going over them and verifying the. Instead, if each chapter committed could let me know that they have looked over the changes, and are OK with them, that will be best. I would like to put out a draft-standard by early next week with all the changes that people have made, so the folks can start to look over it before the next meeting. PLEASE let me know when you have looked over the changes. Thanks, Rich -----Original Message----- From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rolf Rabenseifner Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:40 AM To: Main MPI Forum mailing list Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 Dear all chapter-authors, the merge of existing approved/MPI-3.0/* (svn release 1189) and the whole Fortran ticket #229 is completed and checked in as (1190,) 1191, (and 1192). Please "svn update" you whole approved/MPI-3.0/ to receive all the changed files. With this "my write-lock" on the whole source is released now. Best regards Rolf ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de> > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:04:47 PM > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 > > I hope, that all chapter authors do not edit the tex files today and > tomorrow. Otherwise they can do it again. > or merge the hughes Fortran changes into their changes. > > I'll come back with the results tomorrow. > > Rolf > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> > > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:59:32 PM > > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 > > > > Thanks Rolf! > > > > On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:57 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > > > Dear all chapter-authors, > > > > > > all chapters are touched by the new Fortran interface #229. > > > > > > I just started to include all ticket #229 into all .tex files > > > based on current svn/mpi-forum-docs/approved/MPI-3.0/ SNV release > > > 1189 > > > > > > I'll try to give you the modified .tex for your chapter. > > > Of course, I'll not update this in the SVN because you only are > > > allowed to commit (check in) new tex files. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Rolf -- Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) _______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229
by Bronis R. de Supinski 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

All: FYI: I have merged Rolf's changes into the mpi-3.0-minutiae branch so folks can still use it for ticket 0 changes. Bronis On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > Dear all chapter-authors, > > the merge of existing approved/MPI-3.0/* (svn release 1189) > and the whole Fortran ticket #229 is completed > and checked in as (1190,) 1191, (and 1192). > > Please "svn update" you whole approved/MPI-3.0/ > to receive all the changed files. > > With this "my write-lock" on the whole source is released now. > > Best regards > Rolf > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de> >> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:04:47 PM >> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 >> >> I hope, that all chapter authors do not edit the tex files >> today and tomorrow. Otherwise they can do it again. >> or merge the hughes Fortran changes into their changes. >> >> I'll come back with the results tomorrow. >> >> Rolf >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> >>> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" >>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:59:32 PM >>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 >>> >>> Thanks Rolf! >>> >>> On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:57 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all chapter-authors, >>>> >>>> all chapters are touched by the new Fortran interface #229. >>>> >>>> I just started to include all ticket #229 into all .tex files >>>> based on current >>>> svn/mpi-forum-docs/approved/MPI-3.0/ SNV release 1189 >>>> >>>> I'll try to give you the modified .tex for your chapter. >>>> Of course, I'll not update this in the SVN because >>>> you only are allowed to commit (check in) new tex files. >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> Rolf > > -- > Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de > High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 > University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 > Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner > Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30) > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >

1 0

anonymous SVN of MPI standard LaTeX?
by Jeff Hammond 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

I would like to write a proposal to the MPI Forum myself instead of wasting everyone's time by ranting on this list or by pestering Pavan or Torsten to write something that encapsulates my ideas. I have a Trac account but cannot find the MPI standard LaTeX source in the section marked "Browse Source". I know that some people are about to get LaTeX, and that this seems to be the way that all successful proposals are generated, so can everyone - not just me - get access via anonymous SVN? If I've just failed to find the link to anonymous SVN of the MPI standard, can you remind me? I think that many others would be interested as well, since it doesn't appear that this info is readily available on the various MPI Forum websites. It really doesn't work to require me to copy and paste from the PDF since the few times that I've done that the formatting is all sorts of screwed up and it takes a good bit of time just to make it readable text. If I were to make a proposal involving more than a few sentences, starting from the PDF would be a deal-breaker. Thanks, Jeff -- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229
by Rolf Rabenseifner 27 Jun '12

27 Jun '12

Dear all chapter-authors, the merge of existing approved/MPI-3.0/* (svn release 1189) and the whole Fortran ticket #229 is completed and checked in as (1190,) 1191, (and 1192). Please "svn update" you whole approved/MPI-3.0/ to receive all the changed files. With this "my write-lock" on the whole source is released now. Best regards Rolf ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rolf Rabenseifner" <rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de> > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 4:04:47 PM > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 > > I hope, that all chapter authors do not edit the tex files > today and tomorrow. Otherwise they can do it again. > or merge the hughes Fortran changes into their changes. > > I'll come back with the results tomorrow. > > Rolf > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> > > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 3:59:32 PM > > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Fortran Ticket #229 > > > > Thanks Rolf! > > > > On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:57 AM, Rolf Rabenseifner wrote: > > > > > Dear all chapter-authors, > > > > > > all chapters are touched by the new Fortran interface #229. > > > > > > I just started to include all ticket #229 into all .tex files > > > based on current > > > svn/mpi-forum-docs/approved/MPI-3.0/ SNV release 1189 > > > > > > I'll try to give you the modified .tex for your chapter. > > > Of course, I'll not update this in the SVN because > > > you only are allowed to commit (check in) new tex files. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Rolf -- Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281
by Jeff Squyres 26 Jun '12

26 Jun '12

On Jun 26, 2012, at 5:16 PM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > Do you disagree that Ticket #281 really intends to "migrate C++ > support in the MPI standard from the C++ bindings to the C bindings" > and not "to eradicate/remove/etc. C++ from the standard"? If the goal > of the Forum is to not only remove the imperfect C++ bindings but make > it difficult or impossible to use C++ with MPI, then I'd like people > to raise their hand in Chicago that this is what they meant when they > voted for Ticket #281. I don't think anyone -- not even Doug Miller/IBM -- wants to prevent MPI from being used in C++ applications. This sounds like a giant misunderstanding. -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281
by Jeff Hammond 26 Jun '12

26 Jun '12

I think that it is critical to use the correct language. ï¿½Ticket #281 says that the "C++ bindings" are to be removed. ï¿½It says nothing about removing any other C++ reference. ï¿½While it may be true that most of the references to C++ in the standard are the bindings, the intent of Ticket #281, as stated by many members of the Forum during face-to-face meetings, is for the MPI standard to support C++ via the C bindings. Do you disagree that Ticket #281 really intends to "migrate C++ support in the MPI standard from the C++ bindings to the C bindings" and not "to eradicate/remove/etc. C++ from the standard"? If the goal of the Forum is to not only remove the imperfect C++ bindings but make it difficult or impossible to use C++ with MPI, then I'd like people to raise their hand in Chicago that this is what they meant when they voted for Ticket #281. Jeff On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > Thank you for changing your tone. > > I apologize for offending you with the word "eradicate". The term seemed to fit the actual work being done, though, which was essentially search for all "MPI::" and "C++" references in the MPI Standard document and remove them. > > All this being said, there are some pretty harsh accusations below. I don't feel I deserve them, and am certain that IBM does not. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Douglas Miller ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½BlueGene Messaging Development > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Bldg 030-2 A401 > dougmill(a)us.ibm.com ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 03:27:36 PM---Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > 06/26/2012 03:11 PM > > Please respond to > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > > To > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > > cc > > > Subject > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > There is a huge difference between deprecating support for C++ > _bindings_ and deprecating support for C++ _altogether_. ï¿½The ticket > is about the C++ bindings. ï¿½What Jed and I are trying to do is make > sure that the C _bindings_ allow users to work effectively within C++, > which means support std::complex<float/double/long double>. ï¿½Such > support already exists in MPI 2.2, but it requires changing "::" to > "_" so that one can use them with the C interface. > > It is absolutely true that the Forum wants better C++ bindings and > will kill the original ones to make this happen. ï¿½However, you are the > first and only person who has suggested that the goal is to remove > support for C++ completely. ï¿½I believe that your statement "I thought > the point of 281 was to eradicate C++ from the standard" is completely > wrong and made with malice aforethought. ï¿½You're trying to rewrite > history to further your campaign to punish C++ programmers. > > Many members of the Forum have made it clear that the goal is to > support C++ via the C bindings. ï¿½That does not mean eradicating C++ > from the standard. ï¿½I assume that there will be text expressing the > Forum's believe that the C bindings are sufficient for C++, so clearly > there should be at least one mention of C++ in the standard. > > As I said before, the right way to support C++ datatypes for the C > bindings is to restrict them to when a C++ compiler is used. ï¿½That > solves your issue with not having a C++ compiler. ï¿½I don't see why > you're arguing about the scenario when you don't have a C++ compiler. > Do you really have this use case as an implementer or are you just > making up silly arguments as part of your campaign of hate against > C++? > > It is my understanding that your actions in regards to ticket #281 are > approved by IBM. ï¿½If this ticket is not supported by IBM, then it > would make me happy to hear this. > > Jeff > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > Jeff, This is inappropriate. Especially targeting IBM like that, and on a public mailing list. Ticket 281 has had plenty of discussions and passed votes. This is/was a Forum decision. The fact that I agreed with it, and volunteered to do a lot of the work, is why I am voicing my opinion on this. ï¿½We (the Forum) have said all along that anyone that has a better design for C++ bindings should bring that forward and make a proposal. Getting rid of the current, often considered "broken", C++ bindings is a good way to ensure any future proposal is free to change the design. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Douglas Miller ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½BlueGene Messaging Development > > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Bldg 030-2 A401 > > dougmill(a)us.ibm.com ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > > > Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 02:09:59 PM---Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > > > Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > > > 06/26/2012 01:57 PM > > > > Please respond to > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > > > > > To > > > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > > > > > cc > > > > > > Subject > > > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > > > > Why do you want to make it so damn hard for anyone to use MPI in C++ codes? ï¿½You don't even have to do anything to support C++ because BG-MPI is based upon MPICH2. > > > > Can't we just for once try to take user needs into consideration instead of trying to reduce the workload of implementers as much as possible? > > > > Users matter. ï¿½In IBM land, they are called customers. ï¿½I assure you that some of your largest customers care a great deal about using MPI within C++. > > > > You're going out of your way to try and punish your customers for using C++. ï¿½Can't you just leave them alone? ï¿½Maybe we - the customers - need to leave IBM alone. > > > > Jeff > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > I think the issue is just that how can a standard that does not specify how C++ fits into things (after ticket 281) then go on to define a data type in terms of C++ types? If there is a need for a C (not C++) complex datatype, that should be a new proposal. But that datatype should not, in my opinion, be defined in terms of something like std::complex. If a platform does not support something like C99 complex types, then it will have to implement complex types and ops itself, or be incomplete. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Douglas Miller ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½BlueGene Messaging Development > > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Bldg 030-2 A401 > > dougmill(a)us.ibm.xn--com1212-roac09bd4637gea ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > > > Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 12:31:52 PM---Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > > > Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > > > 06/26/2012 12:21 PM > > > > > > > > Please respond to > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > To > > > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > > > cc > > Subject > > > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > > > > as far as i'm concerned, these types are only valid with the C bindings when a C++ compiler is used. ï¿½does that solve it? > > > > jeff > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > I've got to raise a concern here. If we start defining MPI datatypes to be C++ types then how will an implementation support that with only a C compiler? I thought the point of 281 was to eradicate C++ from the standard (and start over later if C++ was to be defined in the standard). > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Douglas Miller ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½BlueGene Messaging Development > > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Bldg 030-2 A401 > > dougmill(a)us.ibm.xn--com1212-roac09bd4637gea ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ ï¿½ Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > > > Jed Brown ---06/26/2012 11:26:16 AM---Jed Brown <jedbrown(a)mcs.anl.gov> > > > > Jed Brown <jedbrown(a)mcs.anl.gov> > > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > > > 06/26/2012 11:14 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > Please respond to > > > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > To > > > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > > > cc > > Subject > > > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: > > > > There are a few C++-specific datatypes for which it would be worth introducing new C datatypes (e.g., MPI_CXX_COMPLEX). ï¿½It's too bad that no one realized this until now, because this won't make the MPI-3 deadline. ï¿½But it could be part of MPI-3.1 or errata, or some such. > > > > > > Two people in offline discussions have suggested that C bindings to the std::complex types (I'm not aware of anything else that #281 will lose) might qualify as ticket 0._______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Hammond > > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > > University of Chicago Computation Institute > > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.xn--gov12/-yma79al02v (630) 252-5381 > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond(Seeï¿½attached file: pic32424.gif)_______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Hammond > > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > > University of Chicago Computation Institute > > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.xn--gov12/-yma79al02v (630) 252-5381 > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond(Seeï¿½attached file: pic08490.gif)_______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > > -- > Jeff Hammond > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > University of Chicago Computation Institute > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281
by Douglas Miller 26 Jun '12

26 Jun '12

Thank you for changing your tone. I apologize for offending you with the word "eradicate". The term seemed to fit the actual work being done, though, which was essentially search for all "MPI::" and "C++" references in the MPI Standard document and remove them. All this being said, there are some pretty harsh accusations below. I don't feel I deserve them, and am certain that IBM does not. _______________________________________________ Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401 dougmill(a)us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.an l.gov> To Sent by: Main MPI Forum mailing list mpi-forum-bounces <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, @lists.mpi-forum. cc org Subject Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types 06/26/2012 03:11 inaccessible after #281 PM Please respond to Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum@lists. mpi-forum.org> There is a huge difference between deprecating support for C++ _bindings_ and deprecating support for C++ _altogether_. The ticket is about the C++ bindings. What Jed and I are trying to do is make sure that the C _bindings_ allow users to work effectively within C++, which means support std::complex<float/double/long double>. Such support already exists in MPI 2.2, but it requires changing "::" to "_" so that one can use them with the C interface. It is absolutely true that the Forum wants better C++ bindings and will kill the original ones to make this happen. However, you are the first and only person who has suggested that the goal is to remove support for C++ completely. I believe that your statement "I thought the point of 281 was to eradicate C++ from the standard" is completely wrong and made with malice aforethought. You're trying to rewrite history to further your campaign to punish C++ programmers. Many members of the Forum have made it clear that the goal is to support C++ via the C bindings. That does not mean eradicating C++ from the standard. I assume that there will be text expressing the Forum's believe that the C bindings are sufficient for C++, so clearly there should be at least one mention of C++ in the standard. As I said before, the right way to support C++ datatypes for the C bindings is to restrict them to when a C++ compiler is used. That solves your issue with not having a C++ compiler. I don't see why you're arguing about the scenario when you don't have a C++ compiler. Do you really have this use case as an implementer or are you just making up silly arguments as part of your campaign of hate against C++? It is my understanding that your actions in regards to ticket #281 are approved by IBM. If this ticket is not supported by IBM, then it would make me happy to hear this. Jeff On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > Jeff, This is inappropriate. Especially targeting IBM like that, and on a public mailing list. Ticket 281 has had plenty of discussions and passed votes. This is/was a Forum decision. The fact that I agreed with it, and volunteered to do a lot of the work, is why I am voicing my opinion on this. We (the Forum) have said all along that anyone that has a better design for C++ bindings should bring that forward and make a proposal. Getting rid of the current, often considered "broken", C++ bindings is a good way to ensure any future proposal is free to change the design. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401 > dougmill(a)us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 02:09:59 PM---Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > 06/26/2012 01:57 PM > > Please respond to > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > > > To > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > > cc > > > Subject > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > Why do you want to make it so damn hard for anyone to use MPI in C++ codes? You don't even have to do anything to support C++ because BG-MPI is based upon MPICH2. > > Can't we just for once try to take user needs into consideration instead of trying to reduce the workload of implementers as much as possible? > > Users matter. In IBM land, they are called customers. I assure you that some of your largest customers care a great deal about using MPI within C+ +. > > You're going out of your way to try and punish your customers for using C ++. Can't you just leave them alone? Maybe we - the customers - need to leave IBM alone. > > Jeff > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > I think the issue is just that how can a standard that does not specify how C++ fits into things (after ticket 281) then go on to define a data type in terms of C++ types? If there is a need for a C (not C++) complex datatype, that should be a new proposal. But that datatype should not, in my opinion, be defined in terms of something like std::complex. If a platform does not support something like C99 complex types, then it will have to implement complex types and ops itself, or be incomplete. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401 > dougmill(a)us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > Jeff Hammond ---06/26/2012 12:31:52 PM---Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > > Jeff Hammond <jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov> > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > 06/26/2012 12:21 PM > > > > Please respond to > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > To > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > cc > Subject > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > as far as i'm concerned, these types are only valid with the C bindings when a C++ compiler is used. does that solve it? > > jeff > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Douglas Miller <dougmill(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: > > I've got to raise a concern here. If we start defining MPI datatypes to be C++ types then how will an implementation support that with only a C compiler? I thought the point of 281 was to eradicate C++ from the standard (and start over later if C++ was to be defined in the standard). > > > _______________________________________________ > Douglas Miller BlueGene Messaging Development > IBM Corp., Rochester, MN USA Bldg 030-2 A401 > dougmill(a)us.ibm.com Douglas Miller/Rochester/IBM > > Jed Brown ---06/26/2012 11:26:16 AM---Jed Brown <jedbrown(a)mcs.anl.gov> > > Jed Brown <jedbrown(a)mcs.anl.gov> > Sent by: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > 06/26/2012 11:14 AM > > > > > > Please respond to > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > To > > Main MPI Forum mailing list <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org>, > > cc > Subject > > Re: [Mpi-forum] C++ types inaccessible after #281 > > > On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: > > There are a few C++-specific datatypes for which it would be worth introducing new C datatypes (e.g., MPI_CXX_COMPLEX). It's too bad that no one realized this until now, because this won't make the MPI-3 deadline. But it could be part of MPI-3.1 or errata, or some such. > > > Two people in offline discussions have suggested that C bindings to the std::complex types (I'm not aware of anything else that #281 will lose) might qualify as ticket 0._______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > > -- > Jeff Hammond > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > University of Chicago Computation Institute > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond(See attached file: pic32424.gif)_______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > > -- > Jeff Hammond > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > University of Chicago Computation Institute > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond(See attached file: pic08490.gif)_______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond _______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0