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,a9bbfb8cd49f1a51 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!proxad.net!193.252.118.146.MISMATCH!news.wanadoo.fr!news.wanadoo.fr!not-for-mail Sender: obry@PASCAL Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Isn't this in favour of Ada?? References: <42d64dde$0$64794$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk> <42e0a2a6$0$36943$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk> <42e0cd67$0$37532$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk> <42E102A9.5060707@mailinator.com> From: Pascal Obry Date: 25 Jul 2005 18:39:41 +0200 Message-ID: Organization: Home - http://www.obry.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Jul 2005 18:39:42 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.249.127.106 X-Trace: 1122309582 news.wanadoo.fr 1242 81.249.127.106:1182 X-Complaints-To: abuse@wanadoo.fr Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3757 Date: 2005-07-25T18:39:42+02:00 List-Id: "Tassilo v. Parseval" writes: > I don't think that Ada tasks and MPI are comparable. MPI is mainly used I'm not talking about Ada tasking. I'm talking about Ada distributed annex. > in the fields of supercomputing. You would certainly not use it as a > fork or threads replacement (incidentally, the 1.x standard of MPI did > not allow to create processes dynamically) because it would just be too > painful. Indeed, I'm certainly not saying that one should use Ada tasks + fork in a replacement of MPI :) > Furthermore, MPI allows you to write a program that does a calculation > in parallel on your computer and, say, NEC's earth simulator because > data-exchange between processors can happen over TCP/IP. So MPI really > is a way to distribute one application across a huge distributed system > involving workstations that can be anywhere on the internet. Idem for Ada *distributed* annex. > Also, there are MPI bindings for Ada which wouldn't be the case if those > two had the same niches in mind. That's not a proof! It could mean that somebody wanted to use Ada in a larger project where C++/MPI was used for example. Pascal. -- --|------------------------------------------------------ --| Pascal Obry Team-Ada Member --| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE --|------------------------------------------------------ --| http://www.obry.net --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination" --| --| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595