Zitat von Joost van der Sluis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Op woensdag 30-07-2008 om 11:33 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Florian > Klaempfl: > > Marco van de Voort schrieb: > > > > > > Read this and the reactions, and weep: > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/borland.public.delphi.non-technical/browse_frm/thread/db61d19063a2f948/289008199451755a?lnk=gst&q=voort+multicore#289008199451755a > > > > I don't agree on the point that good mt support is a matter of the > > framework. _Really_ good multithreading support is a matter and must be > > a matter of the language as well and in several years and must be as > > common as while or for loops. Currently, multithreaded programming is > > like programming spaghetti basic. A good framework is comparable to at > > least the try to program structured with line numbered basic but it is > > not forced by the language. The compiler must know about parallism. > > I'm not really into paralel-computing. But it does interest me. > > Just to test some ideas/opinions. Could something like this be usefull? > > Function DoSomething(const astring : string) : boolean; parallel; > begin > .. > end > > So that the 'parallel' keywords means that if you call this procedure, > it's started in a separate thread. (maybe just a compiler hint, like in > inline. So that the compiler can decide) > If you actually use the result somewhat further in you program, the > compiler detects this and waits for the other thread to finish, before > it continous. > > Ofcourse, of someone uses some globa-vars in an 'parallel' procedure, he > could be doomed, if he don't know what he does. But maybe the compiler > can even forbid this. > > Would this be usefull at all? Doable?
There is a wiki about that discussion: http://wiki.freepascal.org/OpenMP_support Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
