I think my confusion is that the level argument is passed by value, so it should make no difference to the application whether it's const or not. The const qualifier seems to place a limitation on an implementation of this routine, but I'm not sure why. ~Jim. On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:48 AM, William Gropp <[email protected]> wrote:

There is no rationale, other than that this is an IN argument and hence is unchanged. Of course, declaring it as const achieves nothing new. I think it was just a rote application of that rule, to a routine that is rarely used.

Bill

William Gropp Acting Director and Chief Scientist, NCSA Director, Parallel Computing Institute Thomas M. Siebel Chair in Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

On Apr 6, 2017, at 9:42 AM, Jim Dinan <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi All,

I apologize if this is a dumb question -- what's the rationale for the const qualifier on the level argument to MPI_Pcontrol?

int MPI_Pcontrol(const int level, ...)

Cheers, ~Jim. _______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum

_______________________________________________ mpi-forum mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum