Viewing profile — LightMachine
LightMachine
HN member- Joined
- Sun, Sep 27, 2015, 11:08 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 1,647
- Public activity
- 286 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About LightMachine
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
- story
- story
- story
- story
- story
- story
- story
- story
-
comment
Comment #41149584
The search space I'm using is that of all functions of a given dependent type. That allows you to make the search space by using a strong enough type. For example, if you search fo…
-
comment
Comment #41149565
It will just return the smallest function that passes your tests. It works by enumerating ALL possible functions and running them. Obviously, that naive approach is exponential, so…
-
comment
Comment #41148815
Uhm author here. Not sure why this tweet is on Hacker News, as it is just a non-technical "blog post". But I've posted a follow-up today with some code and details, if you're curio…
-
comment
Comment #40421174
While it is not fast in a single-thread, it is still 5x-7x faster than Node.js today for programs that are allocate a lot. If all you want is to run a program faster, and doesn't m…
-
comment
Comment #40421088
That is actually an amazing idea. I'll adopt it.
-
comment
Comment #40399480
It is not in alpha, nor not ready. You can use it in production today, if you want to. It is just not fast . That is different. CPython is still 100x slower than C, and is widely d…
-
comment
Comment #40398861
I agree... Just a note: we are NOT 10x slower than Python. I think a lot of people got the wrong message from this thread. HVM is actually quite fast already. It is just that, on t…
-
comment
Comment #40397971
I really appreciate the feedback, but the claim is that the performance scales linearly with cores, and it does. Also that it runs on GPUs, and it does. Yet, asking what is its "fl…
-
comment
Comment #40397937
This is on CPU vs GPU. A GPU core (shading unit) is 100x weaker than a CPU core, thus the difference. ON the GPU, HVM's performance scales almost 16000x with 16000x cores. Thus the…
-
comment
Comment #40397906
I really think I take criticism well... The problem is that people were criticizing us for not doing things that were literally done on the second paragraph. So at this point it di…
-
comment
Comment #40396299
I have no idea what you're trying to convey, but I'm Victor Taelin. Also very cool comment on that thread, hypothesizing on whether we'd be able to ever run it on GPUs. We did it! …
- comment
- comment
-
comment
Comment #40395356
Thanks for the feedback. Some corrections: We do use multi-level caching, and you can achieve 5x higher performance by using it correctly. FFI is already implemented, just not publ…
-
comment
Comment #40395138
You're comparing CPU cores to GPU cores! It is "only" 50x because a single GPU core is 100x weaker than a CPU core! Within CUDA cores, it is actually a linear speedup! It does 2k M…
-
comment
Comment #40394484
But it literally says we believe it is the future of parallel computing! If it was faster than GCC today, we would've written present :')
-
comment
Comment #40394434
Thanks for the feedback! Some clarifications: 1. I didn't accuse you of doing something wrong, just that your claim was wrong! It has been proven that Interaction Combinators are a…