This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Intel C++ vs. gcc: New Numbers for New Versions

From: Pop Sébastian <pop at gauvain dot u-strasbg dot fr>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>
Cc: Biagio Lucini <lucini at thphys dot ox dot ac dot uk>, gcc List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:33:17 +0100
Subject: Re: Intel C++ vs. gcc: New Numbers for New Versions
References: <FKEAJLBKJCGBDJJIPJLJOELGDJAA.scott@coyotegulch.com> <Pine.GSO.3.95.1021206110345.2221B-100000@aphrodite> <20021206121557.GB30867@tornado.toronto.redhat.com>

On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 07:15:57AM -0500, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Dec 2002, Biagio Lucini wrote:
> 
> > I had a chance to look at Intel's implementation of OpenMP on a Itanium
> > system and I was not really impressed.

You can also have a look at http://open64.sf.net who implements OpenMP.

>From ./osprey1.0/be/be/omp_lower.cxx 

 Description:
 Functions for transforming WHIRL trees based on OpenMP pragmas.

> It's in my long term TODO list.  But I have neither a detailed
> plan nor an idea of when I'll get started.
> 

Maybe it's worth to have a look at how SGI implemented it.

Sebastian

References:
- Intel C++ vs. gcc: New Numbers for New Versions
  - From: Scott Robert Ladd
- Re: Intel C++ vs. gcc: New Numbers for New Versions
  - From: Biagio Lucini
- Re: Intel C++ vs. gcc: New Numbers for New Versions
  - From: Diego Novillo

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]