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

Provide static initializers for PMIx structs #385

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 7, 2022
Merged

Conversation

rhc54
Copy link
Member

@rhc54 rhc54 commented Jan 17, 2022

Programs that utilize PMIx structures benefit from
being provided with static initializers by which global
variables can be safely declared.

Signed-off-by: Ralph Castain rhc@pmix.org

Programs that utilize PMIx structures benefit from
being provided with static initializers by which global
variables can be safely declared.

Signed-off-by: Ralph Castain <rhc@pmix.org>
@rhc54 rhc54 added the RFC Request for Comment label Jan 17, 2022
@rhc54 rhc54 added this to the PMIx v4.2 Standard milestone Jan 17, 2022
@rhc54 rhc54 requested a review from jjhursey January 17, 2022 01:48
@rhc54 rhc54 self-assigned this Jan 17, 2022
@rhc54
Copy link
Member Author

rhc54 commented Jan 17, 2022

Please use emoji reactions ON THIS COMMENT to indicate your position on this proposal.

You do not need to vote on every proposal
If you have no opinion, don't vote - that is also useful data
If you've already commented on this issue, please still vote so
we know your current thoughts
Not all proposals solve exactly the same problem, so we may end
up accepting proposals that appear to have some overlap
This is not a binding majority-rule vote, but it will be a very
significant input into the corresponding ASC decision.

Here are the meanings for the emojis:

Hooray or Rocket: I support this so strongly that I
want to be an advocate for it
Heart: I think this is an ideal solution
Thumbs up: I'd be happy with this solution
Confused: I'd rather we not do this, but I can tolerate it
Thumbs down: I'd be actively unhappy, and may even consider
other technologies instead
If you want to explain in more detail, feel free to add another
comment, but please also vote on this comment.

@jjhursey jjhursey added the Eligible Eligible for consideration by ASC label Jan 25, 2022
Copy link
Member

@jjhursey jjhursey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What arguments do these macros take?
Should we make them functions per PR #383?

Chap_API_Data_Mgmt.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
@jjhursey
Copy link
Member

jjhursey commented Mar 7, 2022

PMIx ASC 1Q 2022

  • Passed the first vote: 11 yes / 0 no / 0 abstain
  • This is can be merged into main/v5 and v4 branches (I'll work on that)

@jjhursey jjhursey added the Accepted as Provisional ASC vote passed. Accepted as Provisional! label Mar 7, 2022
@jjhursey jjhursey merged commit 7f436bd into pmix:v4 Mar 7, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Accepted as Provisional ASC vote passed. Accepted as Provisional! Eligible Eligible for consideration by ASC RFC Request for Comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants