On Jul 31, 2019, at 10:52 AM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.scie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> You’re going to have to mention C++. You can’t just pretend that C++ supports 
> C11 generic, because it explicitly doesn’t.

We are mentioning C++.  Please re-read my prior email.  

> And you really should do this because it’s ridiculous not to use C++ 
> polymorphism if we use C11’s.

There are three options:

1. Re-introduce C++ bindings, delay MPI-4.
2. Re-introduce C++ bindings, BigCount misses the MPI-4 train.
4. Do not re-introduce C++ bindings, BigCount catches the MPI-4 train.

The feedback from the Forum was that BigCount was a blocker/gating issue for 
MPI-4.  Hence, this is why the BigCount WG is not planning at this time to 
re-introduce C++ bindings via BigCount.

There is a longer term plan (think: MPI-5) to introduce a full-featured set of 
C++ bindings to MPI -- one that does not necessarily have a 1:1 correspondence 
to the C bindings.  That is a different, much longer effort, and will 
definitely not make it into MPI-4.

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com

_______________________________________________
mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org
https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum

Reply via email to