[Beowulf] Re: the comparison between OpenMP and MPI
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Greg Lindahl lindahl at pbm.comTue May 22 13:50:41 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: the comparison between OpenMP and MPI
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: the comparison between OpenMP and MPI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 06:12:11PM +0100, Tim Cutts wrote: > When I looked at the code, I wasn't > surprised. At first glance, my initial reaction was the same as the > compiler's; "Oh, that's dead code, we can eliminate that". Wrong! > It was possible for the code to have an effect, but it was extremely > indirect, and I didn't blame the compiler for screwing up! I don't see why you weren't surprised. If "out" was never assigned, it would be dead code, but "out" is assigned. And though "in" and "out" are aliasing each other, they are of the same type. -- greg
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Re: the comparison between OpenMP and MPI
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: the comparison between OpenMP and MPI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
