Re: Thoughts on llvm/clang in base

["B. Estrade" <estrabd@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 03:17:08PM +0100, peeter (must) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:39 PM, B. Estrade <estrabd@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just throwing this out there, but one thing that made me sad about
> > FreeBSD's dumping GCC as base was that it was also dumping OpenMP
> > support. Given that SMP is the goal, it was a pretty hefty technical
> > benefit that was thrown away for mostly political reasons. I hope
> > OpenMP support in clang/LLVM is bolstered in practice, there are certainly
> > a number of academic efforts using it for OpenMP research. I am not
> > aware of a strong clang/LLVM effort to support it outside of that arena,
> > though. That DF has GCC with faily current OpenMP support in base is a
> > strong reason for me to consider using it primarily over FreeBSD,
> > which is my traditional go-to BSD.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Brett
> 
> 
> Just to chime in with this, we're using OpenMPI on DF and it'd be
> very, very bad news for us if support for OpenMPI would be
> discontinued for the mentioned reason. We'd need to change the
> platform then. . .
> 
> Cheers, Peeter

Do you mean OpenMP (shared memory) or OpenMPI (message passing?). 

OpenMPI is a separate library and not tied into a compiler or its
runtime like OpenMP is (e.g., "GOMP" is the GCC project to handle the
frontend/transformations/runtime).

Thank you,
Brett

> 
> --

-- 
Register Now for cPanel Conference
Oct 8-10, 2012, Houston, Texas
http://conference.cpanel.net/