Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove expanded type support for the newly-deprecated shmem_wait #92

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 1, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@nspark
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 26, 2017

In Issue #84, @jamesaross raised the concern / made the observation that, as written, #32 both deprecated the shmem_wait and shmem_TYPE_wait routines and expanded the required type support of the API. This PR revises the changes in #32 to deprecate shmem_wait without expanding the type support.

@jamesaross

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 26, 2017

Thanks, @nspark. This issue didn't seem to occur to anyone during discussion. It was only when I began implementing the change that I noticed the apparent conflict of adding new deprecated routines. This demonstrates the value of a reference implementation before finalizing a specification.

@jdinan jdinan added the HadReading label Aug 9, 2017

@BryantLam

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

commented Aug 9, 2017

Related: #31 also added the type-generic shmem_wait interface to Spec 1.4 and is now being deprecated in this PR.

@jdinan jdinan added PendingBallot and removed PendingReading labels Aug 18, 2017

@jdinan jdinan added the Ratified label Aug 31, 2017

@jdinan

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 31, 2017

Looks good to me. Can I get a +1 to merge?

@jdinan jdinan merged commit c05161d into openshmem-org:osh_spec_next Sep 1, 2017

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@nspark nspark deleted the nspark:revision/p2p-sync branch Jul 26, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.