Intel Cilk Plus Support Continues For GCC

[curaga]

That link didn't really answer anything, further, it's as far from third-party as possible

I tend to avoid using GPL licensed and similar libraries like cancer in my code and believe that users should have the freedom to modify the code, be able to release it under whatever license and contribute back if they like.

The cancer is very bad description of GPL, because it doesn't hurt anyone. The guardian of freedom is more close to reality. Your approach is very naive, but you have a right to use whatever license you want, because it's your code. However, you're not doing any favor to users of your code and you're not doing it to you either. You're doing a favor to misers and hustlers who want to take somebody's code and close it from others. It's not about freedom, it's about spongers. That's why bsd and similar licenses are very bad.

[curaga]

It's hard to find a third-party unbiased comparison of Cilk vs OpenMP. Cilk has FUD, then Oracle counters with theirs.

I'm only familiar with OpenMP, and so far I don't see any advantage in Cilk over it. Still I'd like to read a thorough comparison.

It's really hard to choose between GCC and Clang with latest Intel OpenMP runtime patches for Clang

No, not really. If someone cares about freedom he chooses GPL projects. Furthermore, GCC proven to be faster than Clang and it's much more mature. There's a need by the FLOSS community to have GPL GCC and having Clang is nothing, but nice option.

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Intel Cilk Plus Support Continues For GCC

As some more positive news for the GCC compiler after writing how NVIDIA and Mentor Graphics could harm the open-source compiler, Intel engineers are continuing to work on improving the Cilk Plus implementation...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTUxNjU