Message-Id: <199903262138.QAA05742@caja.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 16:38:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Nicholas Nevin - Sun HPC High Performance Computing <nevin@caja.East.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: Nicholas Nevin - Sun HPC High Performance Computing <nevin@caja.East.Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: clarification on inter-language interoperability of attributes
To: snir@us.ibm.com
Cc: mpi-core@mcs.anl.gov
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-MD5: WbB7DRyFXc8swew+ZeC6PA==
Sender: owner-mpi-core@mcs.anl.gov
Precedence: bulk


> From: snir@us.ibm.com
> X-Lotus-FromDomain: IBMUS
> To: Nicholas Nevin - Sun HPC High Performance Computing <nevin@caja.East.Sun.COM>
> cc: gropp@mcs.anl.gov, mpi-core@mcs.anl.gov
> Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 16:20:21 -0500
> Subject: Re: clarification on inter-language interoperability of attributes
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> 
> MPI_xxx_get_attr returns a void* value in "attr". If the attribute you accessed
> is a Fortran attribute then (int*)attr will point to an INTEGER.
> MPI_ADDRESS_KIND is irrelevant.
> 
> >


I'm afraid I have to disagree. MPI_ADDRESS_KIND is relevant. 
Here is the binding for MPI_COMM_SET_ATTR.


MPI_COMM_SET_ATTR(COMM, COMM_KEYVAL, ATTRIBUTE_VAL, IERROR)
INTEGER COMM, COMM_KEYVAL, IERROR
INTEGER(KIND=MPI_ADDRESS_KIND) ATTRIBUTE_VAL 

             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?????
             
-nick