Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — GregarianChild

GregarianChild

HN member
Joined
Sun, Feb 23, 2020, 9:17 AM UTC
HN karma
425
Public activity
167 items

About GregarianChild

No profile information was provided.

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #46889936

    The question: "does the ambient programming language do the right thing?" applies to other provers too. So if you assume the semantics of the implementation language is broken, or …

  2. comment
    Comment #46889673

    This is wrong as the others replies also point out. Tactics in LCF-style provers are not part of the TCB. Here is an example of the TCB for an industrial strength prover: ○ https:/…

  3. comment
    Comment #46888031

    LCF-style provers like Isabelle/HOL and HOLlight are some of the most widely used, and oldest interactive theorem provers. If they consistently show smaller error rates than other …

  4. comment
    Comment #46782568

    There are some issues arising from size inconsistencies (AKA Cantor's Paradox) if / when you try to fit the representation of all internal choices (this could be infinite) into a s…

  5. comment
    Comment #46779709

    I'm not an expert in this field, but the way I understand it is that Choice Trees extend the ITree signature by adding a choice operator. Some variant of this: ITrees: CoInductive …

  6. comment
    Comment #46769623

    Thanks. I hope you publish this. I imagine https://github.com/bloomberg/crane/blob/main/theories/Monads... is the functional specification of STM. I see that you use ITrees. WHat's…

  7. comment
    Comment #46765013

    This definition is my potentially flawed attempt at summarising the essence of what program extraction is intended to do (however imperfect in practise). I think extraction goes be…

  8. comment
    Comment #46764998

    Since the point of program extraction from a prover is correctness, I wonder what kind of assertions you prove for STM in Rocq.

  9. comment
    Comment #46756135

    I have another question, the abstract of your paper says that you "provide concurrency primitives in Rocq" . But this is not really explained in the text. What are those "concurren…

  10. comment
    Comment #46755883

    I would phrase it a little different. Simplifying a bit, a compiler tr(.) translates from a source language L1 to a target language L2 such that semantics(P) == semantics(tr(P)) fo…

  11. comment
    Comment #45253197

    > fantasy of yours that never happened Shall we bet money on this? You are right, I don't know much about SpiNNaker. All I know about SpiNNaker is from a talk of Furber's where he …

  12. comment
    Comment #45247505

    > definition of the word neuromorphic The definition of the term is so vague as to be useless for scientific progress. What exactly is excluded by " brain inspired" ? If I paint my…

  13. comment
    Comment #45243321

    I don't rate Furber as a "complete amateur", but he's the exception in this milieu. > Neuromorphic just means brain-like or brain inspired, I don't even see any evidence that 'neur…

  14. comment
    Comment #45242714

    Can you explain the benefit of renaming dataflow as 'neuromorphic'? You do understand that dataflow architectures have been tried many many times? See [1] for a brief history. MIT …

  15. comment
    Comment #45238864

    The 'brain-inspired' community has always been doing this, since Carver Mead introduced the term 'neuromorphic' in the late 1980s. Reselling banalities as a new great insight. My f…

  16. comment
    Comment #44975917

    There is an old CACM post that explains how to use a bit of randomness to avoid only doing semantics preserving program changes. https://cacm.acm.org/research/stochastic-program-op…

  17. comment
    Comment #44972901

    This paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02944 ventures some guesses how Nvidia does this, and runs experiments to confirm them.

  18. comment
    Comment #44969811

    If the search space never leaves the programs that are equivalent to the original specification, that will probably limit the optimisations you can discover. (E.g. if you start out…

  19. comment
    Comment #44966968

    How is this different from superoptimisation? Also, how do you ensure that newly generated kernels are correct w.r.t. the original naive kernel that you use as specification?

  20. comment
    Comment #44299399

    Chisel has a compiler to Verilog. That is not the problem. Many semi-companies use a tool-chain to generate much Verilog from higher-level sources. The rumour I heard was this: The…

  21. comment
    Comment #44282442

    The "intersection of all sets such that" is not vague at all. It's perfectly formally defined in ZF* set theories. But it's impredicative. One of the guiding ideas behind type theo…

  22. comment
    Comment #44217357

    The reason that VLIW/EPIC architectures have not been successful that for mainstream workloads is the combination of • the "memory wall", • the static unpredictability of memory ac…

  23. comment
    Comment #44208500

    Modern GPU instructions are often VLIW and the compiler has to do a lot to schedule them. For example, Nvidia's Volta (from 2017) uses 128-bit to encode each instruction. According…

  24. comment
    Comment #44204764

    I'd be interested to learn who paid for this machine! Did Sandia pay list price? Or did SpiNNcloud Systems give it to Sandia for free (or at least for a heavily subsidsed price)? I…

  25. comment
    Comment #42557963

    > both parallelism and pipelining You are right, but this can be make more precise: pipelining is a specific form of parallelism. After all the different stages of the pipeline are…