Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Greetings David.
> I think we should have a more explicit note about MPI_REAL16 support in
> the README.
> This issue has come up before; see
> If you read through that ticket, you'll see that I was unable to find a
> C equivalent type for REAL*16 with the Intel compilers. This is what
> blocked us from making that work. :-\ But then again, I haven't tried
> the test codes on that ticket with the Intel 11.0 compilers to see what
> would happen (last tests were with 10.something). It *seems* to be a
> compiler issue, but I confess that we never had a high enough priority
> to follow through and figure it out completely.
> If you have an Intel support contract, you might want to take some of
> the final observations on #1603 (e.g., the test codes I put near the
> end) and see what Intel has to say about it. Perhaps we're doing
> something wrong...?
> I hate to pass the buck here, but I unfortunately have a whole pile of
> higher-priority items that I need to work on...
I can confirm that Intel 11.0 produces identical results to 10.something
for you little test program posted with that ticket. I do have a support
contract for Fortran only but we'll see what they say. I'll keep you posted.