(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.5221) [ukfortran] Ballot on draft DTS
Damian Rouson
sourcery
Fri Apr 18 14:42:50 EDT 2014
On Apr 15, 2014, at 12:35 AM, Malcolm Cohen <malcolm at nag-j.co.jp> wrote:
>
> In particular,
> (1) the collectives CO MAX, CO MIN, CO REDUCE, CO SUM, should be split into two
> forms, one with RESULT, one without. The one with RESULT should have SOURCE as
> INTENT(IN), the one without should have SOURCE as INTENT(INOUT). RESULT must
> not be optional. The SOURCE INTENT(IN) form should have no coarray restrictions
> on SOURCE.
Is the reasoning here that there is a potential performance advantage that can be preserved in the ?INTENT(IN)? case? If so, I agree that performance is paramount. If not, please explain the reasoning for wanting two forms rather than having RESULT optional.
Damian
More information about the J3
mailing list