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

Pr/associativity of reductions #14

Closed

Conversation

davidozog
Copy link
Owner

Summary of changes

This reopens #12 to target RC2.

The latest commit, 3519cfd addresses feedback from WG/committee reviews.

Proposal Checklist

  • Link to issue(s)
  • Changelog entry
  • Reviewed for changes to front matter
  • Reviewed for changes to back matter

@davidozog davidozog self-assigned this Oct 3, 2024
@davidozog
Copy link
Owner Author

davidozog commented Oct 3, 2024

@davidozog AR: add an API note that reductions are not exactly associative... A future OpenSHMEM spec will clarify.

WG folks like the idea of of adding support for a reduction API that DOES have well-defined ordering.

@kwaters4
Copy link
Collaborator

kwaters4 commented Oct 7, 2024

@davidozog Let us push this to 1.7. My current understanding is that this may have some larger ramifications with respect to implementations today.

I think for now leaving it up to the implementers to "fix" this may be better.

@davidozog
Copy link
Owner Author

Let us push this to 1.7...

Yes, at the last WG meeting it seemed consensus is to defer this for v1.7 - I will close this PR.

We discussed a possible alternative: add a note that this issue will be clarified in a future version of the OpenSHMEM spec. That PR is prepared in #16

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants