From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Wed Jan 21 22:52:16 2009
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom7
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom7@www2.open-std.org
Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 120BFCA3434; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:52:16 +0100 (CET)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (sentrion1.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.139.105])
	by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0371DCA3432
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:52:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mprox1.jpl.nasa.gov (mprox1.jpl.nasa.gov [137.78.160.140])
	by mail.jpl.nasa.gov (Switch-3.3.2mp/Switch-3.3.2mp) with ESMTP id n0LLqBNN005601
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:52:11 GMT
Received: from [137.79.7.57] (math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by mprox1.jpl.nasa.gov (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n0LLq9Ri015722
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:52:10 -0800
Subject: Re: (j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3871) [ukfortran]  MPI non-blocking
	transfers
From: Van Snyder <Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov
To: sc22wg5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090121212353.12D01C178E0@www2.open-std.org>
References: <20090121110416.958A4C178E0@www2.open-std.org>
	 <20090121192815.CB0B0C178D9@www2.open-std.org>
	 <20090121212353.12D01C178E0@www2.open-std.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Yes
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:52:09 -0800
Message-Id: <1232574729.15119.678.camel@math.jpl.nasa.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-8.el5_2.3) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Source-IP: math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57]
X-Source-Sender: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov
X-AUTH: Authorized
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 13:23 -0800, N.M. Maclaren wrote:
> 
> >We needed one for I/O, but we ought not to need one for interaction
> with
> >procedures having defective interfaces.
> 
> I am not sure what you mean by this. There is nothing conceptually
> defective about MPI's non-blocking interfaces, and it has the decency
> to
> state most clearly that they require semantics that are outside the
> standard. The issue is about how to marry them.

What I meant is that MPI procedures either drag around the address of
the buffer in an opaque data structure, or keep hold of it, so you don't
have to mention it in all the calls where it might be useful to the
compiler to know you're affecting it, such as the wait call.  This
"feature" might be helpful when used from a language where the pointer
semantics paralyze the optimizer, but it is unhelpful in Fortran.