Hmm. "_enum" has possibilities.

How about using a * in the name, to represent where the match is?  E.G.,  btl_usnic_*_enum?

It's a string, so it's not just limited to letters and underscores. 

Sent from my phone. No type good. 

On Nov 5, 2013, at 6:26 PM, "Paul Hargrove" <phhargrove@lbl.gov> wrote:

On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres@cisco.com> wrote:
On Nov 5, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargrove@lbl.gov> wrote:

> If this approach is to be adopted by other components (and perhaps other MPIs), then it would be important for the enumeration variable name to be derived in a UNIFORM way:
>     <framework>_<component>_SOMETHING
> Without a fixed value for "SOMETHING" somebody will need to read sources (or documentation) to make the connection.

This is a good point; we got a similar piece of feedback from the MPI tools group.

How about naming the state variable "<framework>_<component>"?  And then that will apply to all "<framework>_<component>*" pvars.


Hmm...  not sure how that jives with "principle of least astonishment".
Other than that "_SOMETHING" == "" seems like a solution that totally avoids the problems associated with words like "device" (which might imply something about h/w architecture) or "instance" (with potential implications regarding s/w architecture).

So, on balance: +0.9  (my other 0.1 goes to "_enum" for "principle of least astonishment".)

-Paul


--
Paul H. Hargrove                          PHHargrove@lbl.gov
Future Technologies Group
Computer and Data Sciences Department     Tel: +1-510-495-2352
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory     Fax: +1-510-486-6900
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel