From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 29 15:57:00 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC9BAFC7 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:57:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D272418D2 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:56:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.10.5] ([62.246.110.10]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M4kfR-1VKznS2u0D-00yzpA for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2014 16:56:51 +0100 Message-ID: <52E924C4.5070002@gmx.net> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 16:56:52 +0100 From: Michael Schmiedgen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Chisnall Subject: Re: [OT] ta-spring References: <20140129022743.GO52820@hades.panopticon> <7B2C5E6B-C845-4AFB-845F-AAF6F3C1F239@FreeBSD.org> <20140129144518.GR52820@hades.panopticon> <52E91955.9030406@gmx.net> <52E92024.9010501@gmx.net> <57D26185-3443-4EA4-822E-D6D50D23551F@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <57D26185-3443-4EA4-822E-D6D50D23551F@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:MWyISafK7bJ57OtmHlue/jJniUR2CJlivzm9w6MmbSV9GH1oHb6 Qqry5UBVf/AaBs4BMc082K/+/mq0tbmZAb7Usn3gDTEEUtsmwDQT9kTc8UK4kW7wvove0uw c//GtYobpq95X7Bc14dN3CWtfbc2Q8qTr7ChhgsOmYatTSFIbgvHlBLCvhilcb9gMdSbwIv eqasNdLHLpTSK1AwpzHlw== Cc: Dmitry Marakasov , FreeBSD Current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:57:00 -0000 On 29.01.2014 16:42, David Chisnall wrote: > On 29 Jan 2014, at 15:37, Michael Schmiedgen wrote: >> On 29.01.2014 16:16, David Chisnall wrote: >>> On 29 Jan 2014, at 15:08, Michael Schmiedgen wrote: >> >> I thought OpenMP will be an integral part of LLVM/clang in near future, >> at least the front-end part? It seems there are plans to even integrate >> the runtime in the llvm project source tree: >> >> http://openmp.llvm.org/ >> >> Ok, so llvm/clang 3.4 obviously will not ship with OpenMP, but maybe >> later versions. > > Active development happens in Intel's tree, and is slowly being merged upstream. Eventually, Clang will have full OpenMP 4 support, but Intel's tree will have it first and there is likely to be a lag before it makes it into mainline clang. > > As such, it would make sense to have a port as a stop-gap until it is ready. > Ah, ok, that makes sense. Thanks for explanation. BTW very amusing *and* very informative bsdtalk/vBSDCon2013 talk a while ago, thanks for that! :) Cheers Michael