Cilk/Cilk++

[Yigal Chripun]

Robert Jacques wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:20:25 -0700, bearophile
> <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote:
> 
>> Robert Jacques:
>>> Cilk is a less flexible (and also probably less efficient) version of
>>> futures/promises.
>>
>> I don't know how much efficient is one compared to the other, from the
>> site and articles efficiency seems "acceptable". And sometimes less
>> flexible things are simpler to use, and this Cilk seems already
>> getting difficult enough for me.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
> 
> On their own, futures don't require work stealing (inherently greedy),
> so they have less overhead. (I think) They also can be library
> implemented and don't require compilier changes.
> As for simplicity compare
> 
<snip code>

While futures can be implemented in a library it would be even better to
add language support for them in the language. example of this is Herb
Sutter's Concur research project.