Right, that change wouldn't go in this ticket. My question was more along the lines of: Is this something worthwhile in the broader MPI sense? If so, I can create a ticket so we don't lose it. ~Jim. On 2/3/12 2:48 PM, Pavan Balaji wrote:

On 02/03/2012 02:36 PM, Jim Dinan wrote:

...

As long as we're updating this text, do we want to allow any additional routines before MPI_Init/after MPI_Finalize (e.g. MPI_Wtime)?

Why? The changes made so far are all addressing the limitations that need to be addressed for the endpoints proposal. They are not being made lightly. Adding MPI_WTIME is irrelevant for this.

That could be a separate ticket if you like. But there's no reason to mix these two together.

-- Pavan