From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hamza.pair.com (hamza.pair.com [209.68.5.143]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D94F3858D32 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 20:57:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6D94F3858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pfeifer.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pfeifer.com Received: from hamza.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45B8D33E65; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 15:57:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from naga.localdomain (188-23-1-149.adsl.highway.telekom.at [188.23.1.149]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 803F933E4A; Sat, 21 Jan 2023 15:57:18 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2023 21:57:17 +0100 (CET) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Tobias Burnus cc: Jakub Jelinek , Tobias Burnus , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [wwwdocs][Patch] Add OpenMP by-GCC-version implementation status In-Reply-To: <3f8d27e6-0f92-95a9-6d1f-0ce08fb4f13a@mentor.com> Message-ID: <5096c5f4-e8e2-aca5-1cdb-145284ebfad9@pfeifer.com> References: <798bc8e6-567b-5ed6-e298-655948e89f5e@mentor.com> <3f8d27e6-0f92-95a9-6d1f-0ce08fb4f13a@mentor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Scanned-By: mailmunge 3.10 on 209.68.5.143 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, 17 May 2022, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Done so: https://gcc.gnu.org/projects/gomp/ Nice! > Thanks again for all the comments! Always welcome! One detailed I noticed only now: The GOMP project consists of implementation of OpenMP and OpenACC to permit annotating the source code to permit running it concurrently ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ with thread parallelization and on offloading devices Do you have a good idea how to reword that to avoid two instances of "permit" in the same sentence, so close to each other? Gerald