From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Roman Shaposhnick <rvs@sun.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Threads: Sewing badges of honor onto a Kernel
Message-ID: <20040302043425.GB1080@submarine>
References: <000901c3ff18$950fe250$26fea8c0@SOMA> <757a63de546942340d005e0e4fcc471e@terzarima.net> <20040302041309.GA20695@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040302041309.GA20695@localhost.localdomain>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Date: Mon,  1 Mar 2004 20:34:26 -0800
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 09c274ee-eacd-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

What do you guys think of OpenMP extension for C/C++ (http://www.openmp.org) ?
Of course, it's nothing radical, but still being able to write:

#pragma omp for
for (i=0; i<1000; i++) {
     do_something;
}

and not having to worry about nuts'n'bolts of the implementation is pretty
neat. Plus there's a bonus of worry-free synchronization (at least in it's
simplest form of a barrier). 

I do realize, that OpenMP is mostly suited for a domain with short-lived 
fire-and-forget sort of threads, but still, the fact that it's integrated
with the language should be appealing enough.

Thanks,
Roman.

On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 08:13:09PM -0800, Taj Khattra wrote:
> > in contrast to the quote above, in an ancient usenet article,
> > in the context of concurrent programming, i am reasonably certain that
> > rob made the observation that as a discipline, we can learn.  he
> 
> http://groups.google.ca/groups?q=ie=UTF-8&selm=13fi7tINNk1i%40darkstar.UCSC.EDU&rnum=1
> 
> > that seems to me to be a better quote to use.
> 
> i like this line from todd proebsting: ``Concurrency models many
> applications better than objects, yet the world is mired in OO
> religion.''  of course, joe armstrong has been preaching this for
> many years too.