I agree too.
 But I vote for

Parallel::dont_be_lazy_and_use_this_blocking_recv();

;-)

-Ben



----- Original Message -----
From: Roy Stogner <roystgnr@ices.utexas.edu>
To: libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
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
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel