On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 11:07:44AM -0500, Brian Barrett wrote:
> On Dec 6, 2005, at 10:53 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 08:33:32AM -0700, Tim S. Woodall wrote:
> >>> Also memfree hooks decrease cache efficiency, the better solution
> >>> would
> >>> be to catch brk() syst
On Dec 7, 2005, at 9:44 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 11:07:44AM -0500, Brian Barrett wrote:
On Dec 6, 2005, at 10:53 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 08:33:32AM -0700, Tim S. Woodall wrote:
Also memfree hooks decrease cache efficiency, the better solution
w
Begin forwarded message:
From: Aleksandar Donev
Date: November 21, 2005 9:30:18 AM MST
To: J3
Subject: (j3.2005) Re: Derived types according to MPI2
Hello,
Malcolm Cohen wrote:
Which just goes to show that the authors of MPI2 didn't understand
Fortran, since that is completely and utterly
Begin forwarded message:
From: Bill Long
Date: November 21, 2005 11:03:46 AM MST
To: Malcolm Cohen
Cc: J3
Subject: (j3.2005) Re: Derived types according to MPI2
Reply-To: lo...@cray.com
Malcolm Cohen wrote:
Aleksandar Donev said:
(like MPI standard).
Gak. Just because MPI is a load of
Begin forwarded message:
From: Malcolm Cohen
Date: November 21, 2005 11:23:59 AM MST
To: Aleksandar Donev
Cc: J3
Subject: (j3.2005) Re: Derived types according to MPI2
Aleksandar Donev said:
Yes, but the interesting thing is neither me nor Van were aware of
what
the standard actually all
