If someone wants MPI_NO_OP or MPI_REPLACE on MPI_WCHAR, can't they just do it with MPI_Get_accumulate on the appropriate width using MPI_BYTE and MPI_SIZEOF? I see no performance-critical justification for MPI_WCHAR atomic reads and writes. Jeff On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Torsten Hoefler <[email protected]> wrote:

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 04:22:02PM -0500, Jeff Hammond wrote:

...

I don't want to wait for 3.1. Are we seriously going to require MPI_WCHAR support in F&Op to be MPI-3 compliant? That makes no sense. I think the intent of "Any of the predefined operations for MPI_REDUCE, as well as MPI_NO_OP or MPI_REPLACE, can be specified as op; user-defined functions cannot be used." is clear. One could even dream up a use-case for MPI_WCHAR if one wants to emulate an atomic read (using MPI_NO_OP).

I will not vote against an errata if you want to propose text and initiate the process.

Best, Torsten

-- ### qreharg rug ebs fv crryF ------------- http://www.unixer.de/ ----- Torsten Hoefler | Assistant Professor Dept. of Computer Science | ETH Z�rich Universit�tsstrasse 6 | Zurich-8092, Switzerland CAB E 64.1 | Phone: +41 76 309 79 29 _______________________________________________ mpi3-rma mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-rma

-- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute [email protected] / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/parts/index.php/User:Jhammond