I definitively wonder why ? Whoever was the "resistance" might have had a good (r at least valid) orison. I can't find any trace of your patch, but I would definitively be interested to take a look at it (if you can resend it) to avoid triggering the same type of opposition.
On Jul 2, 2013, at 17:17 , Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I submitted a patch like this a while ago, and it met violent resistance. :-) Although no one on the call today remembers exactly who raised the resistance...
> On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:40 AM, "Barrett, Brian W" <bwbarre_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 7/2/13 8:22 AM, "George Bosilca" <bosilca_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Our macros for the OMPI-level free list had one extra argument, a possible return value to signal that the operation of retrieving the element from the free list failed. However in this case the returned pointer was set to NULL as well, so the error code was redundant. Moreover, this was a continuous source of warnings when the picky mode was on.
>>> The attached parch remove the rc argument from the OMPI_FREE_LIST_GET and OMPI_FREE_LIST_WAIT macros, and change to check if the item is NULL instead of using the return code.
>>> Deadline: July 4th
>> Works for me.
>> Brian W. Barrett
>> Scalable System Software Group
>> Sandia National Laboratories
>> devel mailing list
> Jeff Squyres
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> devel mailing list