[fpc-pascal] Common OpenMP syntax?

Vinzent Hoefler JeLlyFish.software at gmx.net
Wed Jul 26 12:20:00 CEST 2006

On Wednesday 26 July 2006 10:00, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Vinzent Hoefler wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 July 2006 09:46, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> > > It seems obvious to me that a global function can be called in
> > > parallel at any time.  The compiler can perfectly detect whether
> > > a global function writes to variables outside it's own scope, in
> > > which case it's probably a no-no to paralellize the function.
> >
> > Hey, you're trying to put more burden on the compiler here as the
> > spec even allows, I'd say.
> >
> > Don't go on or you'll end up with the requirement for compile time
> > dead-lock detection. :)
> Well, my statement is moderate in the sense that the compiler does
> this anyway already (see the hints/warnings about unused
> params/vars); let's use this information as much as we can.

True. Using information that's already there, can't be wrong. I second 

We're not C, where everything is standardized to be the programmer's 
problem. So yes, if concurrency will ever be implemented in the 
language, no matter how, some decent warnings/hints/notes about several 
questionable constructs would be nice.


More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list