From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org  Mon Apr  1 16:03:44 2013
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org
Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 8D6EF356DDB; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 16:03:44 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from ppsw-42.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-42.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.142])
	by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CE95356A01
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Mon,  1 Apr 2013 16:03:40 +0200 (CEST)
X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.51]:33230)
	by ppsw-42.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.159]:25)
	with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:nmm1) id 1UMfKl-0003xP-9T (Exim 4.80_167-5a66dd3) for sc22wg5@open-std.org
	(return-path <nmm1@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:03:39 +0100
Received: from prayer by hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk)
	with local (PRAYER:nmm1) id 1UMfKl-0006bO-Qf (Exim 4.72) for sc22wg5@open-std.org
	(return-path <nmm1@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:03:39 +0100
Received: from [146.90.209.83] by webmail.hermes.cam.ac.uk
	with HTTP (Prayer-1.3.5); 01 Apr 2013 15:03:39 +0100
Date: 01 Apr 2013 15:03:39 +0100
From: "N.M. Maclaren" <nmm1@cam.ac.uk>
To: sc22wg5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.4963) (j3.2006) AW: Thoughts on Reinhold's
 thoughts
Message-ID: <Prayer.1.3.5.1304011503390.23912@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20130401124437.69138356A01@www.open-std.org>
References: <20130331013557.06C46356DD4@www.open-std.org>
 <20130401124437.69138356A01@www.open-std.org>
X-Mailer: Prayer v1.3.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

On Apr 1 2013, Bill Long wrote:
>
>Separate synchronizations of subteams is what SYNC TEAM does.   If 
>that's the model that best fits a particular program, then maybe the 
>programmer should consider using SYNC TEAM instead of CHANGE TEAM.

The use scenario being considered is the following:

Most of the time, images run in the main team or without needing any
synchronisation.  Every so often, SOME of them need to collaborate as
a subteam for a period, and then will rejoin the main team.  The images
that are not part of the subteam are not involved in that collaboration
and have no obvious please to synchronise with it.

Regards,
Nick Maclaren.