From: Kirk, B. (JSC-EG) <Ben...@na...> - 2008-10-28 22:32:35
|
I agree too. But I vote for Parallel::dont_be_lazy_and_use_this_blocking_recv(); ;-) -Ben ----- Original Message ----- From: Roy Stogner <roy...@ic...> To: lib...@li... <lib...@li...> Sent: Tue Oct 28 12:59:00 2008 Subject: [Libmesh-devel] "recv", "irecv" Just a random thought: would it be better to give these functions human-readable names (receive, nonblocking_receive) instead of MPI-derived names? People familiar with MPI still have to look at our headers to determine that they want Parallel::irecv rather than Parallel::Irecv (as well as to see the function arguments), so I don't know if using the same name truncations buys us anything. --- Roy ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list Lib...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel |