From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: should I be interested in ada?
Date: 1999/02/19
Date: 1999-02-19T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7akat7$2ek$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 7ajv17$mrf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com
In article <7ajv17$mrf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
dennison@telepath.com wrote:
> Since Fortran's parallel loops are just loops with extra
> semantics about what dependencies exist between
> iterations, wouldn't it be possible to do the same thing
> in Ada with new loop pragmas? (eg: prama
> No_Loop_Carried_Dependencies (Loop_Label);) Would such a
> scheme render the compiler non-conformant?
Well you can always make arbitrary extensions by using the
fiction that they are pragmas, and this particular form of
the pragma is in fact quite a respectable one, but it is
not what I would choose, I would prefer to have a clear
statement that the branches can be done in parallel, not
some rather peculiar statement with unfamiliar terminology
from which this can be deduced!
As for non-conformance, you can simply implement
for all K in ... loop
and that is still no problem as long as its recognition is
controlled by a switch, e.g. something like --pedantic in
GNU C. So there is never an issue with conformance in
such extensions.
Actually implementation defined pragmas are a rather
pernicious form of language extension, that leaves ISO
Ada even more susceptible to uncontrolled extension than
in COBOL. In COBOL, you have to have a flag that restricts
implementation defined extensions, but there is no such
requirement for Ada with respect to pragmas.
GNAT has added the Restrictions identifiers:
pragma Restrictions (No_Implementation_Pragmas);
pragma Restrictions (No_Implementation_Attributes);
but unfortunately these identifiers are themselves
implementation defined. It would be nice if every compiler
would at least adopt these two restriction identifiers.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-02-19 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 89+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-02-14 0:00 should I be interested in ada? Phillip Helbig
1999-02-15 0:00 ` Gautier
1999-02-15 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-02-23 0:00 ` David Starner
1999-02-16 0:00 ` Ken Thomas
1999-02-17 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-18 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-18 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-18 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-18 0:00 ` dennison
1999-02-18 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-18 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-18 0:00 ` Jerry Petrey
1999-02-18 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-18 0:00 ` Dan Nagle
1999-02-18 0:00 ` nabbasi
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Dan Nagle
1999-02-19 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Dan Nagle
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Peter Hermann
1999-02-19 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-19 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-20 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-21 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-21 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-22 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-19 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-21 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1999-02-18 0:00 ` Joel Seidman
1999-02-18 0:00 ` fraser
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-02-20 0:00 ` fraser
1999-02-18 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-18 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-19 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-20 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-22 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-22 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-23 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-22 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-23 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-25 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-25 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1999-02-24 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-26 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-02-27 0:00 ` Semantic info pragmas (was: should I be interested in ada?) Nick Roberts
1999-03-01 0:00 ` Samuel Tardieu
1999-03-01 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-02-24 0:00 ` should I be interested in ada? William Clodius
1999-02-24 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-25 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-25 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-26 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-18 0:00 ` nabbasi
1999-02-18 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-18 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-19 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Phillip Helbig
1999-02-19 0:00 ` dennison
1999-02-19 0:00 ` robert_dewar [this message]
1999-02-19 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-20 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-22 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-20 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-02-22 0:00 ` dennison
1999-02-22 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1999-02-24 0:00 ` White rabbit (was: should I be interested in ada?) dennison
1999-02-25 0:00 ` Alice books " JP Thornley
1999-02-25 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1999-02-20 0:00 ` should I be interested in ada? robert_dewar
1999-02-20 0:00 ` Steve Doiel
1999-02-19 0:00 ` William Clodius
1999-02-20 0:00 ` Hartmut H. Schaefer
1999-02-20 0:00 ` bill
1999-02-21 0:00 ` dewar
1999-02-21 0:00 ` dewar
1999-02-22 0:00 ` dennison
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox