(j3.2006) [MPI3 Fortran] Feedback from Fortran J3 meeting
Thu May 29 12:54:22 EDT 2008
On Wednesday 28 May 2008 10:11, Keith Bierman wrote:
> it might just be a ?
> lot easier to have an optional part of the Standard which puts MPI in ?
> as special modules
While not opposed to this in principle, I believe that it is a mistake to not
spend the time making a general facility. There are a lot more libraries out
there than MPI. Sure, vendors won't spend the time to support them explicitly
because few users use each of them. But if you add all the libraries in use,
it will come out to more than MPI.
That said, MPI is a good prototype of what all we need to be able to handle,
mostly because it is soo big and has so many things in it.
Also, I am not convinced providing the generic support is that difficult.
Especially if all vendors already do it by crutches (directives, compiler
switches, special modules, whatever).
More information about the J3