Hello Jeff, all, if you allow me my two cents,
* Jeff Squyres wrote on Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:44:28PM CEST: > > At the MPI Forum meeting in Dublin, the MPI ABI meeting was... er... > shall we say, "spirited." :-) Both the benefits and drawbacks of an > MPI ABI are widely contended (it's a surprisingly complex topic). it sounds quite daunting. > - If it is ever completed, MPI ABI compliance will be a separate entity > from the MPI 2.x and 3.x standards. ABI compliance will be a checkmark > for an MPI implementation, but will be unrelated to an implementation's > 2.1, 2.2, 3.0, ...etc. compliance. How can that be possible? An MPI ABI will have to be versioned in the same way that the API is versioned. You can have an ABI version for each API version though, I guess. And of course the MPI C++ ABI will require specifying a C++ ABI (which, for Windows, means specifying the compiler and possibly its major release number used), but this is venturing off into details. Cheers, Ralf
