Parallel Python

[Sergei Organov]

nmm1 at cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) writes:
[...]
> I mean precisely the first.
>
> The C99 standard uses a bizarre consistency model, which requires serial
> execution, and its consistency is defined in terms of only volatile
> objects and external I/O.  Any form of memory access, signalling or
> whatever is outside that, and is undefined behaviour.
>
> POSIX uses a different but equally bizarre one, based on some function
> calls being "thread-safe" and others forcing "consistency" (which is
> not actually defined, and there are many possible, incompatible,
> interpretations).  It leaves all language aspects (including allowed
> code movement) to C.
>
> There are no concepts in common between C's and POSIX's consistency
> specifications (even when they are precise enough to use), and so no
> way of mapping the two standards together.

Ah, now I see what you mean. Even though I only partly agree with what
you've said above, I'll stop arguing as it gets too off-topic for this
group.

Thank you for explanations.

-- Sergei.