Hi Craig, all, (I cc-ed the tools group on this as well - this is regarding the issue how the profiling interface will work with the proposed new Fortran bindings): On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Rasmussen, Craig E wrote:

I've talked with Jeff Squyres and we come up with naming convention that we'd like to propose for tools to have access to Fortran.

I believe we need four different symbol naming conventions. Consider MPI_Recv(), the four functions are

1. mpi_recv_f - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles and the choice buffer passed by address.

Does this mean the existing mpi_recv binding will go away? This would break any existing tool. Can we keep the old naming scheme for the old interface? Or is this intended as an additional symbol?

2. mpi_recv_f_nostatus - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles without a status variable and the choice buffer passed by address.

Is this just for the new bindings?

3. mpi_recv_f08 - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles and the choice buffer passed via an array descriptor.

4. mpi_recv_f_nostatus - This function implements (in C or Fortran) MPI_Recv with integer handles without a status variable and the choice buffer passed via an array descriptor.

I assume you mean mpi_recv_f08_nostatus?

Note that these functions only need to support integer handles because of the way we (thanks to Rolf) have chosen to define the handle types in the mpi_f08 module.

Please comment on this naming convention.

Martin

-craig

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