Re: [Gomp-discuss] Release candidate

[Biagio Lucini]

Hi Jacob, thanks for your comments.

On Tuesday 02 November 2004 12.55, Jacob Weismann Poulsen wrote:
>
> 2) As to the content of libgomp I made a few early experiments
> that wasn't meant to make its way to the official tree. The
> reason is simply that I didn't really think about the structures
> nor the implementation and as Scott has said on several occasions
> (and I think that we all agree on this), we better base the
> implementation on some kind of design document. I would recommend
> that the initial commit will take its offspring in the contents
> at the savannah CVS instead or in version 1.1 of the files in the
> cvs-ball that I mailed you and Scott a long time ago (if I recall
> it right - it seems to be ages ago).
>

Well, this has been debated quite a lot. I was sharing your opinion at the 
beginning, but Diego sort of convinced me that this is not the case, since
having gomp into some branch of gcc will help us to get visibility and to 
receive more comments from other people and get more people involved too. 
Putting out some code at this stage could also allow us to receive 
constructive feedback for the design. If you are concerned of going into the 
official tree, my understanding is that a branch is not an official tree and 
you are free of doing on it whatever you like (subject to the maintainer 
approval, of course). All those arguments to me seem enough to submit a patch 
to gcc-patches for the gomp_branch. Let me stress that with this patch you 
can compile and run OpenMP program (albeit in dummy mode): what this means is 
that people will get for the first time a proof of the existence of OpenMP 
within gcc. Then, maybe everything will need to be erased after we have a 
good design (which - I agree with you - is fundamental). But meanwhile we 
would have discussed, we would have received input, we would have received 
more help and perhaps even flames that can be useful for future development.

Also, for my personal point of view, I have learnt a lot by working just on 
the building of the tree within gcc. This would not have been possible by 
simply committing the first tarball into savannah CVS. I think there is lots 
more than can be learnt by using a pragmatic approach. However, this is 
mainly your code, and my opinion here counts very little; but since the stubs 
are public, I would like at least to submit a libgomp_stubs. So let me know 
if you want some code to be removed from the current tree, and I will take 
fully responsibility myself for the rest. Of course, similar remarks also 
apply to the other two of you that have contributed code, namely Scott and 
Lars. 

Thanks,
Biagio

-- 
=========================================================

Biagio Lucini                                 
Institut Fuer Theoretische Physik
ETH Hoenggerberg      
CH-8093 Zuerich - Switzerland           
Tel. +41 (0)1 6332562  
 
=========================================================