What do you mean by "complicated", here ? Parallel is always more complicated than sequential. Still, we can't keep living in the sequential world, I guess you know.
This is the wrong way of thinking. We don't need parallelism because we can't keep living in the sequential world.
Let's put it this way: this parallel patch is a small, incremental modification to the code base that speeds up searching on most nowadays PCs. Compare with rewriting the search capability from scratch, that would require a huge invasive patch modifying probably each and every inset.... that deserves the "complicated" adjective, IMHO :-) [but, again, I agree that it would also reduce the search time by one or two orders of magnitude].
I would rather see a small and incremental modification that gets us closer to the "correct" solution, then a small, incremental modification that takes us onto yet another detour.
Vincent
