(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.4023) Late in the day question

[Andy Vaught]

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 dick.hendrickson at att.net wrote:

> It's my belief that FORALL was a mistake.  Before a processor can
> efficiently optimize a general FORALL construct it must prove a
> bunch of theorems about left-to-right and line-to-line independence
> and the theorems are almost identical to the ones it would have to 
> prove in order to vectorize a loop.  

  ... and in the case that it can't, compiler-generated temporaries are
required.  Yuck.  Making FORALL conceptually simple ended up making it
almost worthless.  Concurrent do is much better, even though it requires
more care to use.

    Andy