Talk:Parallel computing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Out of date
UHHH!!!! This page is really gross and out of date :(
Very very slightly better now. The first section still needs further breakup and generalisation and there should be more in the pre-toc sumary part. Also, the software part needs expansion and something should be done with the 'general topics' part.
- I managed to refine it. It is better now. :)--Leo 03:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] OpenMP and MPI
These two are under programming languages but they aren't, they are library for C/C++ and FORTRAN High level programming languages.
- Strictly, OpenMP is a language extension API while MPI is a libary API. But informally, they are called programming languages by many users. --Leo 22:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Subject matter
If there's anybody who actively maintains this article, I think it ought to be rephrased a bit to at least acknowledge that TLP and multiprocessing aren't the only forms of parallel computing; ILP just as significant. -- uberpenguin 07:41, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed merge
I'm proposing that Parallel programming be merged into Parallel computing, since the bulk of the content (what little there is) in Parallel programming is already contained in the Parallel computing article (which also provides more context). Is there significant additional content that can be added to Parallel programming to justify keeping it a separate article? --Allan McInnes 20:37, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Nope.. That article can easily be included as a subheading of this one. Go ahead and merge them. -- uberpenguin 21:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Concurrency wikiproject
I have put up a proposal for a concurrency wikiproject at User:Allan McInnes/Concurrency project. Input from all interested parties (especially those who will actually contribute) is most welcome. --Allan McInnes 21:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Update: the concurrency wikiproject has been subsumed by the larger (and more active) WikiProject Computer science. --Allan McInnes (talk) 17:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge status
What is the status of the merge? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adamstevenson (talk • contribs).
- The merge was completed on January 20, 2006. Parallel programming is now a redirect to Parallel computing. --Allan McInnes (talk) 17:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Need some hints on how to NOT get my content obliterated :-)
OpenMP is great, but if you go to the official website, you realize the last posting of "In the Media" is 1998. You then realize this is for Fortran and C++.
My point is the world has moved on to multicore chips in $900 laptops, Java and C#. Parallel computing has moved _much_ farther than OpenMP has. We need more content here for the masses, not the PhD's on supercomputers.
I tried to post _recent_ information about new parallel frameworks like DataRush, but was 'smacked down' by Eagle_101 (or some close facsimile) and all my content was obliterated.
QUESTION: Why is it okay for Informatica, Tibco and other large corporations to post massive marketing datasheets in wikipedia, but not allow subject matter experts to post useful information in appropriate topic areas?
I concede DataRush is free but not open source, nor a global standard. But indeed it is recent, topical and factual. The programming framework exists, is useful to mankind etc...etc... So why does wikipedia not want to inform the world of its existence? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EmilioB (talk • contribs).
- Well, you might start by contributin actual content, instead of just a link. The fact that the link looks a lot like an attempt to advertise (which is generally discouraged on Wikipedia) probably didn't help matters. --Allan McInnes (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Someone may want to add Java-specific parallel computing frameworks
There are two key frameworks in the Java community -- DataRush and Javolution.
Both provide "hyper-parallel" execution of code when you use the frameworks.
http://www.pervasivedatarush.com
Emilio 16:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)EmilioB
[edit] Great quote
"One woman can have a baby in nine months, but nine women can't have a baby in one month." - Does anyone know the origin of this quote? Raul654 17:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
