Xref: utzoo comp.lang.apl:210 comp.parallel:336 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!hubcap!eos!eugene From: eos!eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya) Newsgroups: comp.lang.apl,comp.parallel Subject: Re: APL for Parallel Algorithms Keywords: APL, parallel processing Message-ID: <3789@hubcap.UUCP> Date: 7 Dec 88 19:23:45 GMT Sender: fpst@hubcap.UUCP Lines: 20 Approved: parallel@hubcap.clemson.edu I asked several people involved in the use of APL on the STAR-100 at LLNL in the 1970s why it didn't take off (The "Geez, it's logically parallel vector [what have you]...") The inconsistent reply had to do with the order of evaluation. Steve Wallach at Convex has also mentioned APL and I sent him Tim Budd's APL compiler (would not quite come up on on C-1, yacc problems). It will be interesting to watch the development of parallel languages in coming years: the semantics of parallelism have changed, how much will look like APL? How much will differ? Portability (compiler/interpreter as well as program) will be an increasing concern. If APL lags, you won't see it on parallel machines (APL2 on IBMs may be an exception due to inertia). Another gross generalization from --eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: "Mailers?! HA!", "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology." {uunet,hplabs,ncar,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene "Send mail, avoid follow-ups. If enough, I'll summarize."