On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: > On Feb 16, 2009, at 9:14 AM, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > >> After running my testsuite again and next looking at >> "ompi/mpi/c/comm_set_errhandler.c", I noticed that >> MPI_Comm_set_errhandler() do return MPI_ERR_COMM when invalid >> communicators are passed. IMHO, for the sake of consistency, you >> should fix MPI_Comm_get_errhandler() to behave the same as the setter. >> Would this rationale be enough? > > > Looks like we're a bit all over the map: > > - comm_set_errhandler: mpi_err_comm > - comm_get_errhandler: mpi_err_arg > - file_set_errhandler: mpi_err_file > - file_get_errhandler: mpi_err_file > - win_set_errhandler: mpi_err_arg > - win_get_errhandler: mpi_err_arg > > I agree that it would be good to have these all be consistent. Just to be > sure: are you saying you'd prefer MPI_ERR_COMM|FILE|WIN for each of these > (respectively), vs. all of them returning MPI_ERR_ARG? >
Yes, I prefer the MPI_ERR_COMM|FILE|WIN if you pass the null handle to the MPI_XXX_{get|set}_errhandler. Of course, remember that for MPI_File, the rules are a bit different: MPI_FILE_NULL have to be special-cased as it is a valid handle for this call... OTOH, if you have a valid Com/File/Win handle, but you try to set MPI_ERRHANDLER_NULL, then in all cases we should get MPI_ERR_ARG (as MPI does not provide a dedicated error class for signaling invalid Errhandler handles). > -- > Jeff Squyres > Cisco Systems > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > -- Lisandro Dalcín --------------- Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC) Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594