On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 02:56:54PM -0400, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> So my question is, should we consider #pragma omp for and
> #pragma omp parallel for a separate scope around the for loop for
> this kind of purpose or not? I think it would be better to be
> consistent with -fno-openmp (i.e. if ther
On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
While looking at PR c++/24512, I have noticed that for
#pragma omp {,parallel }for loops we don't handle -fno-for-scope
Issue a sorry and don't worry about it? -fno-for-scope is for legacy
code for people that can't be bothered to spend a fe
Hi!
While looking at PR c++/24512, I have noticed that for
#pragma omp {,parallel }for loops we don't handle -fno-for-scope
and don't emit the default error messages that point people to
the problem otherwise.
So my question is, should we consider #pragma omp for and
#pragma omp parallel for a se
