(j3.2006) Integration of co-arrays with the intrinsic shift functions
Thu Jul 12 18:26:04 EDT 2007
nOn Thu, 12 Jul 2007, keith bierman wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2007, at 3:14 PM, Andy Vaught wrote:
> > I'm not saying that your proposal is without merit or shouldn't be
> > adopted, but you're moving into an area in which calculations will be
> > irreproducible from run to run.
> What language in the current (or previous) standards can you point to
> that requires reproducible results?
> This isn't a new problem, but it certainly does get more obvious as
> parallelism and heterogeneous computing becomes more common. But even
> a uniprocessor with a single floating point unit (e.g. the 8087) can
> exhibit it (admittedly that's pathologically rare; but I've seen that
> sort of thing most of my life ... attached array processors, parallel
> processors, different steppings of multiprocessors, etc.).
> As best I can tell, no Standard from 66 onward ever *required*
> reproducible results. Clearly, on conventional uniprocessors failure
> to do so is unexpected and is a quality of implementation issue. But
> on more exotic machines ... it's never been carved in stone.
I did misunderstand Craig's original post and agree with you that the
language does not require it.
However, if a language makes it easy to write programs that have
semi-random output, such programs become extraordinarily hard to debug and
will hopefully lead to the decline in the use of such a language.
More information about the J3