[llvm-dev] [Openmp-dev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Proposing an LLVM subproject for parallelism runtime and support libraries

[andreybokhanko via llvm-dev]

Hal,

> 1 июня 2016 г., в 14:22, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> написал(а):
> I agree that the 'openmp' runtime project logically fits within the purview of a 'parallel' project. We may even want to move it there eventually. We might also want it to remain separate while the project uses its own coding conventions (which are different from LLVM's coding conventions for historical reasons). We're not yet had that conversation, but it is a good one to have.  

Any reasons why we want to disrupt an established project and its users? Just because we prefer "parallel" as a name for a new project and want to validate this choice by moving an actual parallel runtime there?

Also, Chris' arguments on SE's lack of  users / standard body make a lot of sense to me. I remember that CilkPlus was rejected for the same reasons. Why SE (PPM, not the library) is different?

Yours,
Andrey
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20160601/548ca1b2/attachment.html>