Talk:OpenMP

message: Is the con "Low parallel efficiency: rely more on parallelizable loops, leaving out a relatively high percentage of a non-loop code in sequential part" valid given the pragmas
# #pragma omp sections
# #pragma omp section
mikeliuk 08:09, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At least that "benefits vs. downsides" isn't specific to OpenMP. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 17:45, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pros and cons 

message: gcc-4.1.2 on RedHat EL 4 does support OpenMP, contradicting the statement in the Implementations section which claims that OpenMP first appeared in gcc-4.2  --Dwchin (talk) 18:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: NM. Found this discussion -- apparently, RedHat backported it in. --Dwchin (talk) 18:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implementations 

message: For anyone just getting started (like me) with OpenMP, if you want to compile these sample programs with gcc, just add the "-fopenmp" flag (at least, that's all I had to do for the sample programs). 131.215.105.153 (talk) 19:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope it wasn't, I've fixed it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SamuelThibault (talk • contribs) 21:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  quick tip to compile 

message: I compiled both c and c++ version with gcc 4.3.2 and the outputs look quite different:
./openmptestc
Hello World from thread 3
Hello World from thread 0
Hello World from thread 2
Hello World from thread 1
./openmptestcpp
Hello World from threadHello World from threadHello World from thread1
0
Hello World from thread23
There are 4threads
The latter is different after each execution
--14:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The output is correct. You are seeing the streaming operator interleaving its operation across different threads. You can add a critical pragma to cout/cerr to prevent multiple threads calling the std. lib simultaneously, and the output will look similar. however this complicates the example unneccesarily, and I am not sure it really helps the point. User A1 (talk) 16:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  bug in c++ code section 

message: External links in an article lede are a bad idea. The openmp website is already linked in the "External links" section. Furthermore as this is a description of a system or product, as far as I am aware there is no requirement (at least under US law) for trademark notices to be added. Additioanlly such entries in the article lede are incongrous with the remainder of the passage. For more information on appropriate use of external links, see WP:LINK, additionally polices on writing a good lede are at WP:LEDE. I would prefer to discuss content here, in an open fashion rather than via email. User A1 (talk) 23:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  OPENMP link 

message: On my machine I need to add #pragma omp critical before the first printf in the C example for a correct functioning. Looks like it is not save to execute printf in parallel similar to what is mentioned in the c++ example.--Jocme (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  C printf needs also critical 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on OpenMP. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130809153922/http://openmp.org/wp/about-openmp/ to http://openmp.org/wp/about-openmp/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm a developer who uses OpenMP on occasion. We took a bug report for a failed compile because Microsoft compilers only support OpenMP 2.0 but we used an OpenMP 3.0 feature. We had no idea modern Microsoft compilers only support an early 2000's version of the standard.
The _OPENMP preprocessor macro documents the year and month (yyyymm as a decimal integer) of the release. It appears Microsoft advertises 200203 (yyyymm), which is somewhere between OpenMP 2.0 and OpenMP 2.5. In contrast, GCC advertises 201511.
A table that provides release versions and release dates (perhaps with some compiler support) would probably be very helpful to developers like me who land on this page after a search.
Jeffrey Walton  (talk) 08:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think the article would benefit from a table with _OPENMP date and release number