From owner-sc22wg5+sc22wg5-dom8=www.open-std.org@open-std.org Tue Dec 10 21:07:09 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom8 Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom8@www.open-std.org Received: by www.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521) id 5B997358254; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:07:09 +0100 (CET) Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org Received: from out.ipsmtp2nec.opaltelecom.net (out.ipsmtp2nec.opaltelecom.net [62.24.202.74]) by www.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 290B7356DA9 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:07:06 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApQBABt0p1ICZRmK/2dsb2JhbAANTA6DMbkiToE3gxkBAQEDAQEBATUbEwgLEAsYCQQhDwIWAS8GAQwBBQICh3gTsEWKPIYQF44jEQFQB4Q0BJVFgk+BMJNNP4Fx X-IPAS-Result: ApQBABt0p1ICZRmK/2dsb2JhbAANTA6DMbkiToE3gxkBAQEDAQEBATUbEwgLEAsYCQQhDwIWAS8GAQwBBQICh3gTsEWKPIYQF44jEQFQB4Q0BJVFgk+BMJNNP4Fx X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,866,1378854000"; d="scan'208";a="75881224" Received: from host-2-101-25-138.as13285.net (HELO [192.168.1.2]) ([2.101.25.138]) by out.ipsmtp2nec.opaltelecom.net with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2013 20:07:06 +0000 Message-ID: <52A77465.40904@stfc.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 20:07:01 +0000 From: John Reid User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/25.0 SeaMonkey/2.22.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "N.M. Maclaren" , Van.Snyder@jpl.nasa.gov CC: sc22wg5 Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.5142) From WG9 minutes References: <20131210014201.047623582EE@www.open-std.org> <20131210093525.3EA1B3582CB@www.open-std.org> In-Reply-To: <20131210093525.3EA1B3582CB@www.open-std.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org Precedence: bulk N.M. Maclaren wrote: > On Dec 10 2013, Van Snyder wrote: > >> From Canada's national body report to the WG9 (Ada) meeting in >> Pittsburgh Friday 15 November 2013: >> >> In Canada's previous national body report to WG9, it was >> proposed that Canada would initiate a request to SC22 at its >> September plenary to form a study group to determine the >> feasibility of creating a parallelism model that could be shared >> between programming languages. Such a model ideally would allow >> for optimal use of the system processing resources and avoid >> over-subscription of parallelism. >> >> The request was made at the plenary, but SC22 declined to create >> such a study group, and instead encouraged other languages to >> participate in CPLEX. > > As I have said before, I don't think that it is a feasible objective, > as there are several fundamentally different models involved, but I do > agree that studying the issue is a good idea. Can anyone Email me a > link to the CPLEX referred to here, as a simple search gets a lot of > false positives? This is what I said in my report from the SC22 meeting (N1993): "3. Fine-grained parallelism There was some discussion of fine-grained parallelism and we are encouraged to participate in the web-based C Parallel Language Extensions Study Group (CPLX). To do this, please contact the WG 14 Convenor, John Benito, benito@bluepilot.com. Conveners are asked to report on this at the 2014 plenary, so please let me have your thoughts. I will contact John myself. I explained about our TS, including our plans for support of continued execution with failed images." This does remind me that I have not contacted John Benito. Will do that now. John. > > In particular, I believe that WG5 should at least keep in touch with > initiatives on SIMD and tasking models (message-passing is already > covered). Fortran is ahead of the pack on the former, and it would be > a good idea to maintain that position! And at least some simple forms > of the latter would be easy - which is not to say that they should be > standardised. > > > Regards, > Nick Maclaren. > > > > _______________________________________________ > ukfortran mailing list > http://lists.accu.org/mailman/listinfo/ukfortran