I didn't misspeak in my email. :-) That being said:
1. If the Java sizes are fixed, great. It should make writing configury to find matching C types easier (because we know what the Java sizes are). 2. George raises a good point: we support the MPI_INTx_T datatypes now, which probably obviates the need for any extra configury (since the Java sizes are fixed). On Feb 20, 2013, at 3:44 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > Might be just fine - need to see how many of the types have issues, how best > to correct them > > On Feb 20, 2013, at 12:32 PM, George Bosilca <bosi...@icl.utk.edu> wrote: > >> That is wrong with MPI_INT64_T ? (MPI 3.0 standard page 26.) >> >> George. >> >> On Feb 20, 2013, at 21:12 , Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Feb 20, 2013, at 12:08 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <griboz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 20, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <griboz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) >>>>>> <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>>>>> If someone could write some generic java code to figure out the size of >>>>>>> a java type (and either printf it out, or write it to a file, or >>>>>>> otherwise be able to give that value to a shell script), that would be >>>>>>> a good start. >>>>>> >>>>>> No need for that -- type sizes in Java are fixed. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/nutsandbolts/datatypes.html >>>>> >>>>> True - but the ones on the C-side are not, and that's the problem. >>>> >>>> My point was that there is no need to write java code to detect type >>>> sizes. About C types -- don't we already check those anyway? Sure, >>>> we need to match these with java side, but there's no need to write >>>> new code to check type sizes. >>> >>> >>> I think you misunderstood - we are talking about writing build-system code >>> that matches the discovered C-type sizes to the corresponding known Java >>> type. This is the source of the reported problem. >>> >>> And yes - Jeff misspoke in his note. I've straightened him out over the >>> phone. :-) >>> >>>> >>>> Dmitri >>>> >>>> -- >>>> main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if >>>> (j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <griboz...@gmail.com>*/ >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> devel mailing list >>>> de...@open-mpi.org >>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> devel mailing list >>> de...@open-mpi.org >>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> de...@open-mpi.org >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
