Re: [Gomp-discuss] corrections to gompspecs.tex

[Scott Robert Ladd]

Biagio Lucini wrote:
> At that time, we decided to start from C because Fortran 77 did not look a 
> good investment for the future and F95 was far from being complete. Now 
> things have probably changed, and F95 could be a more suitable target for our 
> hack. In any case, Steven and Paul should be reading this mailing list, so 
> they can give their opinion on this topic.

After making a few trivial contributions to gfortran, I'm delving deeper
into the architecture with an eye toward making other contributions. As
such, I'm best-equipped to make contributions to the Fortran 95 version
of Open MP.

> Final thought: the more technical people in this mailing list (I'm not one of 
> them) are heavily busy either with tree-ssa or with gcc- f95; probably we 
> will make no progress here until those projects are in a more advanced stage 
> or new enthusiastic and fresh forces join gomp.

Part of the problem is time; I'm just coming out of a business crisis
(self-employment is both boon and bane), and am just beginning to get my
head above water. Debates in the main gcc mailing list suggest that
tree-ssa is some time away from being merged into mainline.

--
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
Software Invention for High-Performance Computing