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=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,fd3a5ba6349a6060
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com>
Subject: Re: should I be interested in ada?
Date: 1999/02/19
Message-ID: <7akvaq$j5t$4@plug.news.pipex.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 446252441
References: <7a72e6$g55$1@probity.mcc.ac.uk> <36C93BB4.1429@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
 <7afc1o$3mi$2@plug.news.pipex.net> <7afttr$7v3$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <7aganu$qsc$1@plug.news.pipex.net> <7ai4rb$5vn$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <7aingo$orv$2@plug.news.pipex.net> <7ajl7i$e8v$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <7ajv17$mrf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Organization: UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET
 WorldCom)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-02-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dennison@telepath.com wrote in message <7ajv17$mrf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
[...]
|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?


I don't think there would be any point. In nearly all practical cases, an
optimiser can determine if the order of iteration of the loop doesn't
matter; it can then do vectorisation or parallelisation perfectly well.
(And, in many cases, the optimiser can be helped simply by rearranging the
algorithm a little.)

-------------------------------------
Nick Roberts
-------------------------------------