Michael G wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was wondering if there has been any consensus regarding the openMP
> implementation (see http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/parallel).  I
> would put my vote for proposal 6 or 7 simply because they seem to
> allow for the most control over shared/private variables and the
> scheduler openMP is using.  On the other-hand, the comments based
> implementations would be very easy to code!
>
> So the question is: what are people doing right now to implement
> openMP in their code?

Not using Cython. All the OpenMP I have heard of has been using C and just
wrapping the code in Cython. Doing so would be a terrible experience.

If you want to help make this happen let us know. As far as I know, none
of the existing Cython developers have any personal interest in OpenMP for
their own projects.

BTW, my vote is for a more or less direct mapping of OpenMP into the
Cython language first time around (through e.g. magic functions in a magic
cython.openmp namespace). There's loads of features which can't be mapped
directly to a single for-loop. Then, once one has some experience using
OpenMP and Cython together and common patterns emerges, one can look into
http://wiki.cython.org/enhancements/parallel.

Dag Sverre

_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to