[cfe-dev] Adding "simd" pragma to Clang

[Andrey Bokhanko]

The reaction seems to be positive so far.

OK, we (meaning someone from Intel) are going to prepare and commit support
for #pragma omp -- using the metadata that Renato introduced.

Andrey



On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Andrey Bokhanko
<andreybokhanko at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Continuing (and forking :-)) the discussion started by Renato (
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2014-February/035162.html),
> what is the community's opinion on introducing pragma simd support in clang?
>
> One possibility is to commit "#pragma omp simd" implementation, which is a
> part of OpenMP 4 standard (
> http://www.openmp.org/mp-documents/OpenMP4.0.0.pdf, section 2.8). I see
> two downsides here: a) "omp" prefix (which might be confusing to some) and
> b) necessity to add -fopenmp to enable support (this also automatically
> links OpenMP RTL, which has nothing to do with this particular pragma).
>
> Another possibility is to drop omp prefix -- this removes the downsides
> mentioned above (and yes, makes the pragma similar to what is proposed in
> CilkPlus -- not necessarily a bad thing in itself).
>
> IMHO, both alternatives provide a useful, standards-based tool to control
> vectorization in clang / llvm compiler -- while also advancing clang's
> compatibility with existing standards.
>
> We (Intel) can contribute all required code -- implementation is ready,
> just needs some massaging before submission to clang trunk.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Yours,
> Andrey
> ========
> Software Engineer
> Intel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20140213/a52fd1b0/attachment.html>