From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Fri Aug 11 11:36:31 2006
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dmo5
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dmo5@open-std.org
Received: by open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id 90B7025342; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:36:31 +0200 (CET DST)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130])
	by open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03232495A
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:36:28 +0200 (CET DST)
X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned
X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from draco.cus.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.18]:43172)
	by ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]:25)
	with esmtp id 1GBTRC-0003yr-0z (Exim 4.54)
	(return-path <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk>); Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:36:18 +0100
Received: from nmm1 (helo=cus.cam.ac.uk)
	by draco.cus.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.61)
	(envelope-from <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk>)
	id 1GBTRC-0000sK-5p; Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:36:18 +0100
To: van.snyder@jpl.nasa.gov
cc: sc22wg5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>, szymansk@cs.rpi.edu
Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.3412) Invitation to write about Fortran in "Scientific Programming" 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:55:03 PDT."
             <20060810215537.452B7249DC@open-std.org> 
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:36:18 +0100
From: Nick Maclaren <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <E1GBTRC-0000sK-5p@draco.cus.cam.ac.uk>
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk

I hesitate to say anything, still less make an offer, but there is one
aspect that I think is worth a brief note that is dear to my heart.
It is just how well the original Fortran computational/memory model
has allowed procedural forms of parallelism.  Some were doubtless
thought of by Backus, but I'll bet not all.

I am thinking of (a) distributed memory message passing (like MPI),
(b) vector-like SIMD (numerous examples) and even (c) hierarchical
threading (e.g. OpenMP).  All have been addable with minimal changes
to the language's basic model and modest extensions.

The same is not true, of course, of the non-procedural parallelism
models, but that is only to be expected.

Is anyone picking this up?  Because I think that someone should.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
Email:  nmm1@cam.ac.uk
Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679
