Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #1274Re: C vs. FORTRAN (was C official DOD langauge?)
From: Vinod Grover
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 1990 17:45
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 1990 17:45
12 lines
1139 bytes
1139 bytes
In article <3169@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes: >: b. The C for statement does not have a well defined >: "control variable" and thus cannot be automatically >: vectorized. > >Bogus. It is true that there is no _syntactically_ distinguished >variable, but all you have to do is watch out for a variable which >is incremented by a constant and is tested against an invariant bound. Also, make sure that the variable is not subject to hidden side-effects, if you want to vectorize the loop or perform strength reductions on operations involving that variable.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<136827@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!slug!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!brahmand.Eng.Sun.COM!groverReferences:
<1633@dinl.mmc.UUCP> <3169@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!slug!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!brahmand.Eng.Sun.COM!grover From: grover@brahmand.Eng.Sun.COM (Vinod Grover) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: C vs. FORTRAN (was C official DOD langauge?) Message-ID: <136827@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 7 Jun 90 17:45:39 GMT References: <1633@dinl.mmc.UUCP> <3169@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. Lines: 12