On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 7:09 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> writes: > > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 6:15 AM, Lisandro Dalcin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On 22 March 2018 at 12:51, Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Lisandro Dalcin <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ftp://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/nightlylogs/archive/ > >> 2018/03/21/examples_master_arch-linux-cxx-cmplx-pkgs-64idx_churn.log > >> >> > >> >> The thing is, PETSc does not currently have a way of mapping a plain > C > >> >> `int` type to a PETSc datatype. I'm wiling to take the required work > >> >> to fix this issue. > >> > > >> > > >> > Is this not what PetscMPIInt is for? > >> > > >> > >> No, not at all, PetscMPIInt it not even mentioned in the PetscDatatype > >> enumeration. The whole PetscDatatype this is kind of messy, and fixing > >> it should take some time, and this for sure will no make my h-index > >> explode, right?. For now, mapping MPI_INT -> PETSC_ENUM seems > >> workaround the issue just fine. > >> > > > > What I meant was, we already have a typedef 'PetscMPIInt' which is > supposed > > to reproduce MPI_INT, so why not add PETSC_MPI_INT to the PetscDataTypes > > rather than map MPI_INT to PetscEnum? > > https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/issues/188/remove-use-of-petscdatatype > I agree, but this was about short term fixing. Matt -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ <http://www.caam.rice.edu/~mk51/>
