Hi Thomas, On 20 Feb 2015, at 19:46, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:35:18 -0800, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On Feb 20, 2015, at 6:36 AM, Ilya Verbin <iver...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I assumed that nobody would build an offloading compiler with >>> --enable-languages >>> other than c,c++,fortran[,lto]. >> >> :-) You should try objc and obj-c++… With some luck, they might just work >> out of the box. > > At least objc does build indeed (gets enabled by default if > --enable-languages is not explicitly specified). Now we just need > someone to write additional OpenACC/OpenMP test cases... Are you or Iain > interested (in doing that)? ;-D Well, the mantra is "Objective-C,C++ are supersets of the underlying languages". So, for a first cut, it should be possible to run all the existing C and C++ testcases with -x objective-c,c++ respectively. If that doesn't work as expected - we should examine why (and identify any restrictions that apply). Do you want to try that (at least once manually) to see if there are any show-stoppers? (I don't have an accelerated setup here). That should be adequate, for now at least, since there are currently no Objective-C family-specific OpenAcc or OpenMP clauses (AFAIU). FWIW, I, for one, have implemented real-time signal processing and data collection systems in Objective-C (a useful thin wrapper to get access to GUI features, without slowing the actual work down). So, it seems reasonable that acceleration capabilities will be interesting to (at least some) Objective-C users. As for the future (i.e. should the Objective C family support extra capabilities in this area), IMO, unless we see some killer capability that is a "must have" (for stage #1 of course), then let's leave the lead on language features to the "defining implementation" (i.e. clang). TBH, we are somewhat behind on Objective-C in any event, catching up to modern capabilities is a higher priority for me. cheers Iain
