Yes, but every time the MPI Forum breaks backwards compatibility, an angel 
loses its wings, so we can’t fix design flaws like this.  Everyone must suffer 
forever.

More seriously, Lisandro pointer out that we’d need allocate and deallocate 
functions for status if they were handles to hidden state, so we can’t just fix 
this by making Status opaque.

I guess we have no choice but to standardize the MPI_Status object size and 
layout.

Jeff

> On 21Nov 2022, at 2:43 PM, Skjellum, Anthony <tony-skjel...@utc.edu> wrote:
> 
> It should be an opaque object :-) 
> 
> Anthony Skjellum, PhD
> 205-807-4968
> 
> 
> On Nov 21, 2022, at 7:29 AM, Jeff Hammond via mpi-forum 
> <mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> I assume that MPI_Status is not opaque because somebody asserted that 
> function call overhead was too much for some use cases.  Was there more to it 
> than this?
> 
> Why does the standard say there is an opaque part for elements and cancelled, 
> but not make those visible?  The lack of consistency here doesn't make a lot 
> of sense to me.
> 
> MPI_Status not being opaque was a horrible mistake but I would like to be 
> less mad about it by learning what possible reasons for it existed in 1995.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jeff 
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Hammond
> jeff.scie...@gmail.com <mailto:jeff.scie...@gmail.com>
> http://jeffhammond.github.io/ 
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjeffhammond.github.io%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctony-skjellum%40utc.edu%7Cf1d5f0680d544ee0772408dacbbc0e58%7C515813d9717d45dd9eca9aa19c09d6f9%7C0%7C0%7C638046305807053236%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=qWvXenIAdNgUWL74kx0UX%2ByQj6uApmpMFmPCi3aqjH0%3D&reserved=0>_______________________________________________
> mpi-forum mailing list
> mpi-forum@lists.mpi-forum.org
> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpi-forum

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

Reply via email to