Ok, great. Indeed, there is a bug in gcc 4.5, which is fixed I believe in 4.6. For the OpenMP backend that's not such a big issue, as it's likely not very useful anyway.
On 26 November 2011 18:35, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm all for allowing it at the Cython level even though we can't emit > code for it at the C level (due to C compiler bugs, right?) > > - Robert > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 3:12 AM, mark florisson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think we should allow nested prange()s, although it won't invoke >> nested OpenMP parallelism now, it still specifies that iterations are >> independent which can be useful for optimizations now (e.g. collapsing >> two loops into one) and in the future with other backends. Any >> thoughts or objections? >> _______________________________________________ >> cython-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel >> > _______________________________________________ > cython-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel > _______________________________________________ cython-devel mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
