[J3] [EXTERNAL] [BULK] Re: Commutativity of co_reduce

[Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101)]

There is no “array-element order” here.   At most there is “image order”.


  *   Tom

From: J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> on behalf of Van Snyder via J3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Date: Friday, October 25, 2024 at 3:17 PM
To: j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
Cc: Van Snyder <van.snyder at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [BULK] Re: [J3] Commutativity of co_reduce
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of NASA.  Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments.  Use the "Report Message" button to report suspicious messages to the NASA SOC.


On Fri, 2024-10-25 at 13:47 +0900, Malcolm Cohen via J3 wrote:
erhaps it would help to insert something like "The choice of x and y is processor dependent." into the second paragraph of the OPERATION argument. I don't think that is strictly necessary, but it would make it more explicit, which is probably a good thing, and avoids an accidental misreading of it being "undefined".

Even more explicitly, add "and they are not necessarily in array-element order".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20241025/af38b5a2/attachment.htm>