From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Tue Jun 23 21:30:14 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom7 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom7@www2.open-std.org Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 8DCE8C178E7; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:30:14 +0200 (CET DST) X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from mail.jpl.nasa.gov (sentrion1.jpl.nasa.gov [128.149.139.105]) by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35212C178E5 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:29:48 +0200 (CET DST) Received: from mprox1.jpl.nasa.gov (mprox1.jpl.nasa.gov [137.78.160.140]) by mail.jpl.nasa.gov (Switch-3.3.3mp/Switch-3.3.2mp) with ESMTP id n5NJTkIC008353 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:29:47 GMT Received: from [137.79.7.57] (math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by mprox1.jpl.nasa.gov (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n5NJTifW005294 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:29:45 -0700 Subject: Late in the day question From: Van Snyder Reply-To: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov To: sc22wg5 Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Yes Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:29:44 -0700 Message-Id: <1245785384.5080.923.camel@math.jpl.nasa.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-8.el5_2.3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: math.jpl.nasa.gov [137.79.7.57] X-Source-Sender: Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Authorized Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk It's kind of late in the day to ask such a question, but why did we invent DO CONCURRENT instead of just extending the rules of the FORALL construct? Does FORALL really have any advantage that DO CONCURRENT doesn't? -- Van Snyder | What fraction of Americans believe Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov | Wrestling is real and NASA is fake? Any alleged opinions are my own and have not been approved or disapproved by JPL, CalTech, NASA, the President, or anybody else.