Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler optimization research?)

"James J. Weinkam" <jjw@cs.sfu.ca>
Mon, 20 Aug 2007 05:12:19 GMT

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[7 earlier articles]
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt jwkenne@attglobal.net (John W. Kennedy) (2007-08-15)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt wyrmwif@tsoft.org (SM Ryan) (2007-08-16)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt bmoses-nospam@cits1.stanford.edu (Brooks Moses) (2007-08-15)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt mojaveg@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (2007-08-17)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2007-08-17)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com (Peter Flass) (2007-08-17)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt jjw@cs.sfu.ca (James J. Weinkam) (2007-08-20)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2007-08-20)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt jvorbrueggen@mediasec.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan_Vorbr=FCggen?=) (2007-08-21)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt tom@kednos.company (Tom Linden) (2007-08-26)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2007-08-29)
Re: Vector assignment semantics (was Re: latest trends in compiler opt tom@kednos.company (Tom Linden) (2007-09-11)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "James J. Weinkam" <jjw@cs.sfu.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers,comp.lang.pl1
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 05:12:19 GMT
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 07-08-01607-08-021 07-08-024 07-08-034 07-08-037 07-08-040 07-08-041 07-08-044 07-08-051
Keywords: parallel, PL/I

Peter Flass wrote:
>
> Thanks for the reply. I guess I'll have to dig out the standard and
> see how it actually reads. Given the choice, however, I'm going for
> compatibility with the IBM compilers,


If you are going to have array expressions and assignments compatible with the
current IBM compilers then according to the Enterprise LRM:


1. Array expressions are evaluated element by element in row major order, and


2. An array assignment is equivalent to a set of nested loops which effectively
perform a series of scalar assignments in row major order.


This obviates the need for array temporaries except for the final result of an
array expression.


The description in the Enterprise manual is essentially identical to that which
appeared in the F and Optimizer reference manuals back in th 60's and 70's.


For both array expressions and array assignments all arrays involved must have
the same number of dimensions and identical bounds.


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.