On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Micha Nelissen wrote:
> Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > >> The latter. > > > > Which is why I think that it's better to have them as local functions, > > instead of having to introduce a lot of new functions. > > There is no real reason to restrict 'parallel' to local functions, is > there ? No, but I used that because in the example you make use of variables defined in the local function, but also in the parent function. It seems obvious to me that a global function can be called in parallel at any time. The compiler can perfectly detect whether a global function writes to variables outside it's own scope, in which case it's probably a no-no to paralellize the function. The programmer could help there by adding the parallel keyword indicating that the programmer knows it is safe to parallelize it. For local functions it is less obvious, there the compiler could use some help in most cases... Michael. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
