Let's kill c-iterate.c

[N8TM@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/8/99 4:36:35 PM EST, craig@jcb-sc.com writes:

> do these iterators represent a programmer's
>  promise to not care *one whit* about the order or parallel-ability
>  of iterated computations?  I don't think that's *quite* the case for
>  Fortran's vector notation, but am not knowledgeable enough about F90
>  to say.

Fortran array assignments require that the entire calculation should be 
carried out using the data values existing immediately prior to the 
assignment.  A compiler has the choice of figuring out what order of 
operations is required to make this happen, or simply to place the results in 
a temporary vector until finished, if there is a possibility of aliasing 
which is not ruled out by the standard.  If there's a clearer or more correct 
way to state this, please let me know.  FORALL opens more cans of worms but 
asserts parallelizability.

Tim
tprince@computer.org