Re: [OMPI devel] shmem vs. oshmem

2013-10-25 Thread Paul Hargrove
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > 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]? My USD 0.02: If the examples were written

Re: [OMPI devel] shmem vs. oshmem

2013-10-25 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
On Oct 25, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Igor Ivanov 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

Re: [OMPI devel] shmem vs. oshmem

2013-10-25 Thread Igor Ivanov
Hi Jeff, I would like to add few notes inline Igor On 25.10.2013 20:33, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: We had a few emails a little while ago, and decided that the branding should be "oshmem" because Open SHMEM is different than (original) SHMEM. I notice that there's still: - shmemcc / shm

[OMPI devel] shmem vs. oshmem

2013-10-25 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
We had a few emails a little while ago, and decided that the branding should be "oshmem" because Open SHMEM is different than (original) SHMEM. I notice that there's still: - shmemcc / shmemfort / shmem_info / shmemrun --> should these all be "oshmem*" ? - the examples are hello_shmem* and ri