On Feb 8, 2017, at 10:28 AM, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@inria.fr> wrote:
>> 1. You reverted an actual grammar fix: "support" -> "supported".
> Oops, I missed that part, sorry.

Cool -- you just put that back; thanks.

> No, but as of now there is just no way that binding can be supported
> without knowing anything about the OS. There is simply no standard way
> of binding a thread as of now. I don't see a reason why we could let
> users lose time with trying to determine whether it actually works or
> not while it will just never work with the current codebase, and I doubt
> we will ever see a really standard OS way of binding threads. If that
> ever happens, we can still change the phrasing here, while letting the
> user be unsure about the current state means making him lose time.

I see where you're coming from.  I still don't think that "likely" is bad to 
have, but this likely isn't worth arguing about.

(I'll likely just disable the email hook, re-commit "likely", re-enable the 
email hook, and YOU'LL NEVER KNOW!  WORLD DOMINATION!!  ;-) )

(and now that I'm consciously thinking about it, I am also likely to over-use 
"likely" for at least the rest of today)

Jeff Squyres

hwloc-devel mailing list

Reply via email to