Jeff, since you wrote this text, what do you think of Martin’s comments? Kathryn _________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, [email protected], http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA On 5/17/14, 11:35 PM, "Martin Schulz" <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Kathryn, all,

A few comments: - "Adhere to the same definition from the MPI implementation.” - not sure what we meant with this anymore. Perhaps we should just drop this part. - "OUT index values” is not correct, since index values are IN parameters to the get_info calls. Perhaps just drop OUT? - The mandate of equal OUT/INPUT values is also not quite right - for the strings, it’s OK to return substrings of the size argument is too small. I know that’s a technicality, but I am not sure if this causes problems later down the road.

The rest looks good to me.

Thanks,

Martin

________________________________________________________________________ Martin Schulz, [email protected], http://scalability.llnl.gov/ CASC @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA

On 5/15/14, 2:55 PM, "Kathryn Mohror" <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi all,

Here¹s the draft for ticket #383 that we want to have voted on in June. That means we need to send out the final version on Monday May 19. So, have a look and speak up if you don¹t like it ASAP!

Kathryn

_________________________________________________________________ Kathryn Mohror, [email protected], http://scalability.llnl.gov/ Scalability Team @ Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

_______________________________________________ mpiwg-tools mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-tools