Hacker News Reader

You seem to have concurrency confused with parallelism. Concurrency just means working on another task before the prior one has completed. You're describing parallelism which is doing multiple tasks at the same time.

View on HN

Parallelism necessarily implies concurrency [1]

So, "SIMD concurrency" is not incorrect (although SIMD parallelism is more correct :)

1: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/155110

This not true. CPUs have instruction parallelism, even on a single CPU, but there is no observable concurrency.

SIMD is data-level parallelism, not concurrency.

By SIMD concurrency, I meant that I was curious about a construct that actually translated into simultaneously executing code, not just a construct that denotes work that "could" be done simultaneously.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com