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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6f24e26ea2e03c4
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!188.40.43.213.MISMATCH!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada parallelism (was: Re: Threadpool with priority version 1.1
 ...)
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:04:18 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <Xns9D45A37BFD4DFWarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.245>
References: <21e6697e-fd7c-4c5e-93dc-8d894449b5e6@f8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
 <ff3671a8-cf19-4cee-8b71-305bb6b1e9c1@l25g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <4ba9e189$0$6886$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <1id5xnuz0x892$.1odbic5ppiv07.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4baa27f2$0$6770$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <Xns9D4580FB5667EWarrensBlatherings@188.40.43.245>
 <4baa5987$0$6762$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:04:18 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: feeder.eternal-september.org;
	logging-data="28639"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19JBP0LvJunYrDV4OXsvAzG33lZrgn0yls="
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-Face: 
 &6@]C2>ZS=NM|HE-^zWuryN#Z/2_.s9E|G&~DRi|sav9{E}XQJb*\_>=a5"q]\%A;5}LKP][1mA{gZ,Q!j
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ztVaBEi68eCAtNS/0YouAqqVG9g=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9747
Date: 2010-03-24T20:04:18+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus expounded in news:4baa5987$0$6762$9b4e6d93
@newsspool3.arcor-online.net:

> Warren schrieb:
>> Georg Bauhaus expounded in news:4baa27f2$0$6770$9b4e6d93
>> @newsspool3.arcor-online.net:
>> 
>>> Dmitry A. Kazakov schrieb:
>>>>  how the proposed algorithms map onto the
>>>> Ada tasking model, especially taking into account that Ada tasking
>>>> primitives are higher level, than ones known in other languages.
> 
>>> As a side note: it seems anything but easy to explain
>>> the idea of a concurrent language, not a library, and
>>> not CAS things either, as the means to support the programmer
>>> who wishes to express concurrency.
>>> Concurrency is not seen as one of the modes of expression
>>> in language X. Rather, concurrency is seen as an effect
>>> of interweaving concurrency primitives and some algorithm.
>>>
>>> What can one do about this?
>> 
>> I thought the Cilk project was rather interesting in
>> their attempt to make C (and C++) more parallel
>> to take advantage of multi-core cpus. But the language 
>> still requires that the programmer program the parallel 
>> aspects of the code with some simple language enhancements.
>> 
>> As cores eventually move to 128+-way cores, this needs
>> to change to take full advantage of shortened elapsed
>> times, obviously.  I think this might require a radical
>> new high-level language to do it.  
> 
> Or efficient multicore Ada will have to go radically back to
> the roots ;-)  

I do believe that an Ada compiler probably has enough 
internal info to manage something along this line. Some
work would also have to be done to deal with explicitly
coded tasking.

> How did they achieve efficient execution on
> massively parallel processors? HPF? Occam? What do Sisal
> implementations do?

I don't know about them, but if any of them are "interpreted",
then there would be execution time semantics possible.

Warren