<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- Generated on Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:12:35 -0800 -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <atom:link href="http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <title>Intel Software Network Comments feed</title>
    <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/feed/</link>
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <item>
      <title>By smith</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ 
how does par_for know how many cores you have available if other processes are running?
 ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-58</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:16:59 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-58</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By Aaron Tersteeg</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ 
Smith,
A thread pool is created to run programs that use the parallelism features. The number of threads in the pool is determined at runtime based on the number of logical cores available on the system. Tasks are then scheduled to those threads. The other processes running on the system are not directly taken into account. (Thanks to Rajiv for emailing me the answer). I've set up a thread on the forum for further discussion at: http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/isn/Community/en-US/forums/ShowThread.aspx?PostID=30248790#30248789
 ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-60</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:52:36 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-60</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By Xinmin Tian</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ 
More accurated and completed answers are provided.
 ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-61</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:03:29 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-61</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By Xinmin Tian</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ 
For __par for, the execution model is not based on tasks. It is simply a OpenMP fork-join model with static-even loop partitioning based on the number of cores in the system. 

Also, we have two modes for multi-processes running case, you can choose by setting  the library environment KMP_LIBRARY=[turnaround | throughtput] 
Details see the reply I posted in the discussion forum
 ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-62</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:08:54 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-62</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By Wieland Eckert</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ 
I reject the idea of adding yet another set of incompatible keywords to a particular compiler.
We see dozens of approaches to parallelism. From what I've read I see no difference to a &quot;#pragma omp parallel for&quot; statement. I'd strongly recommend to go ahead with just a single surface form.
Now what's under the hood could be completely different and innovative, that I can not judge. Here is the realm for new inventions. Please don't pollute the keywords.
 ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-76</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 02:27:47 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-76</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By Robert Myers</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ 
Linux?
 ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-144</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:16:46 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-144</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By aaa</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ salam ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-9042</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 22:20:37 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-9042</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>By sajid shamsi</title>
      <description><![CDATA[ I am new to learning C++. I going through basic books and cds. The code above is a little different than I have seen in the books. If I down load this trail version, would I be able to run some basic C++ codes? Please advice. ]]></description>
      <link>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-16540</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 06:15:02 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-c-parallelism-exploration-compiler-prototype-edition/#comment-16540</guid>
    </item>
  </channel></rss>