Feedback from call last week:
-
- make yoda work with all btls
- pragmas in MPI_Init/Finalize seem sketchy
- possible conflict between opal and oshmem ptmalloc?
- be careful of BTL move to OPAL
Jeff's questions:
-
- All the CMake and .windows stuff can
Now that we are forcing the use of a C99 compiler, should we start allowing
//-style comments?
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
Sorry it took so long to forward these notes to everyone. Here's some notes
from the BTL meeting we had in Knoxville a few weeks ago.
> Date:
>Feb. 12, 2013
>
> People:
>Thomas Herault
>George Bosilca
>Jeff Squyres
>Brian Barrett
>Aurelien Bouteiller
>Ralf Castain
All,
[This is in complement to the internal notes that Jeff sent out earlier.]
As you might have heard some of us had a meeting few weeks ago at UTK to talk
about the BTL, and their possible move down at the OPAL level. As a result
several key components have been identified as susceptible cand
We talked about this on the call today.
The conclusion was that we *are* using AC_PROG_CC_C99 in configure, which
should hypothetically set the right compiler flags to put the compiler in C99
mode, where // should be accepted without warning.
If someone wants to take a few minutes and verify th
