i thought I mentioned this before, but the compilers should be oshcc, oshCC, and oshfort, with the starter named oshrun, according to Appendix C of the spec.
Brian W. Barrett
Scalable System Software Group
Sandia National Laboratories
From: devel [devel-bounces_at_[hidden]] on behalf of Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) [jsquyres_at_[hidden]]
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 3:32 PM
To: Open MPI Developers
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OMPI devel] shmem vs. oshmem
On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Igor Ivanov <Igor.Ivanov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> - shmemcc / shmemfort / shmem_info / shmemrun
>> --> should these all be "oshmem*" ?
>> - the examples are hello_shmem* and ring_shmem*
>> --> should these all be "*_oshmem*" ?
> These examples are not OpenSHMEM specific.
>> - there are header files named shmem*
>> --> I'm guessing the names "shmem.h" and "shmem.fh" are mandated
> OpenSHMEM specification says
So ya, those names are standardized -- no problem.
But shouldn't we be branding everything else as oshmem? Even if the examples are not oshmem-specific.
We're shipping oshmem, not shmem, so why not call them oshmem examples [that also happen to be shmem examples] -- rather than shmem examples [that also happen to be oshmem examples]?
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
devel mailing list