From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5164ccc41905b2d0
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Received: by 10.180.93.230 with SMTP id cx6mr6992945wib.5.1362757652507;
        Fri, 08 Mar 2013 07:47:32 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 g1ni53858wig.0!nntp.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!78.46.240.70.MISMATCH!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.teledata-fn.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 16:47:06 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130216 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada and OpenMP
References: <fbdb8bd7-be77-4338-90ba-0b0c212f121f@googlegroups.com>
 <87k3pjht79.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <hr-dnULuncyRjqTM4p2dnAA@giganews.com>
 <khb8m6$933$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <3e01ac49-4427-4f50-8577-8edab7e539a6@googlegroups.com>
 <khbmmp$fd5$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <f6fff4ba-e9a1-4335-a4a0-cb9d60152ad9@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <f6fff4ba-e9a1-4335-a4a0-cb9d60152ad9@googlegroups.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Message-ID: <513a07fb$0$6643$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 08 Mar 2013 16:47:07 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 01a6529a.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=e\=<08jg7Zkg`45cDR8l?oA9EHlD;3Ycb4Fo<]lROoRa8kF<OcfhCOkXG44Z`h@GQonc\616M64>jLh>_cHTX3jmIWj:Y@AiR@d
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2013-03-08T16:47:07+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 08.03.13 15:53, Rego, P. wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 7, 2013 4:42:59 PM UTC-7, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> 
>> Ada is about doing things right, and that should be true even for 
>> implementation-defined stuff. And we *need* people to figure out good ways 
>> of doing these things (for instance, a "parallel" classification for 
>> functions would be very helpful). The sloppy way helps little.
> 
> Got your point. 
> Would you have a suggestion on how I could a loop such as "parallelization" like
> 
> pragma OMP(Parallel_For) 
> for I in 1 .. MAX loop 
>    A(I) := A(I) + 1 
> end loop; 

If A is an array of small objects, then with GNAT on Intel,
you can turn on -ftree-vectorize (or -O3) and see what this gives.

Adding -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2 (old) or -fopt-info-optimize
instructs GCC to report successful vectorizations.