On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 21:14, Kai Germaschewski <kai.germaschewski at unh.edu>wrote:
> Just a (kinda arbitrary) data point: I introduced MPI_IN_PLACE in my code > a year or so ago (not realizing that it requires MPI-2.0 at the time) and > within a year, I hit two cases of machines that were still running MPI 1.x > -- and the code doesn't get to run in all that many places in the first > place. > What sort of configurations were these? > > Having said that, I think it's generally a good idea to not keep backwards > compatibility cruft around forever. OTOH, requiring MPI2 just for > MPI_IN_PLACE isn't a real convincing case, since it's so easy to do the > same with MPI1. > I agree, this is mostly cosmetic, but there are more MPI-2 features that would also be useful. There are places where having MPI 1-sided would greatly simplify, for example. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20111110/80b7e4ad/attachment.html>
