Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tektronix!nosun!lfm.fpssun.fps.com!lfm
From: lfm@fpssun.fps.com (Larry Meadows)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Why array notation
Message-ID: <349@lfm.fpssun.fps.com>
Date: 9 Nov 88 19:35:03 GMT
References: <689@convex.UUCP> <1763@garth.UUCP>
Reply-To: lfm@lfm.UUCP (Larry Meadows)
Organization: FPS Computing, Beaverton,OR
Lines: 27

[ bunch of stuff about Parallel DO versus array notation ]

Well, there was the FORALL statement in an earlier version
of '8X:
	FORALL (I=1:N) A(I) = B(I) + C(I)

FORALL says all iterations are done at once, so in simple
cases is equivalent to array assignments, but is less restrictive,
e.g.
	FORALL (I=1:N) A(I,I) = B(I)

Also, there are notations like that used by Kuck & Associates'
KAP tool:
	DOALL (I = 1:N)
	  A(I) = B(I) + C(I)
	END DOALL

DOALL says iterations may be executed in parallel in any order;
so:
	DOALL (I=1:N)
	  A(I) = (A(I-1) + A(I+1))/2
	END DOALL

gives undefined results.
-- 
Larry Meadows @ FPS			...!tektronix!fpssun!lfm
					...!nosun!fpssun!lfm