Who is behind Vertex.ai? Could not find any information about it. Is it AMD?
Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
21–30 of 39 posts
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#22In most other languages this would fail code review as it is overly terse. I can see it does match the mathematical notation but if the language is supposed to provide any layer of abstraction then it doesn't do a very good job IMO. I guess the target market are mathematicians who already understand and write mathematical notation.
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#23when i read "a language for X" I think "ok...no"
What's wrong with domain specific languages? SQL is a language for database manipulation, jq is a language for querying JSON, CSS is a language for styling documents, etc.
Can you state in advance the scope of the domain ? Probably not, hence DSLs tend to grow extensions to cover unforeseen usecases - better to use a library written in a real language.
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#24In most other languages this would fail code review as it is overly terse. I can see it does match the mathematical notation but if the language is supposed to provide any layer of abstraction then it doesn't do a very good job IMO. I guess the target market are mathematicians who already understand and write mathematical notation.
Since when was terseness a bad thing?
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#25In most other languages this would fail code review as it is overly terse. I can see it does match the mathematical notation but if the language is supposed to provide any layer of abstraction then it doesn't do a very good job IMO. I guess the target market are mathematicians who already understand and write mathematical notation.
Since when was terseness a bad thing?
Immediately after you are tasked to maintain said overly-clever and overly-terse code.
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
taco's runtime appears to be designed for large sparse data while we designed Tile specifically for the dense linear algebra operations in neural nets. Quite a bit of work has gone into making the Tile runtime do the necessary optimizations to make neural nets run efficiently on GPUs and other accelerator designs, none at all for sparse workloads. Given that I'd expect the internals to be fairly different.
Have you benchmarked Tile against Stalin∇? https://github.com/Functional-AutoDiff/STALINGRAD Page 3: http://barak.pearlmutter.net/papers/ad2016b.pdf
Who in his right mind would name a library after Stalin?!
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you benchmarked Tile against Stalin∇? https://github.com/Functional-AutoDiff/STALINGRAD Page 3: http://barak.pearlmutter.net/papers/ad2016b.pdf
Who in his right mind would name a library after Stalin?!
It’s a word play on “Stalingrad”.
It’s kind of funny.
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who in his right mind would name a library after Stalin?!
It’s a word play on “Stalingrad”. It’s kind of funny.
If I would name a library after a man who directly ordered to kill your grandparents and grandparents of your colleagues by shooting them in back of their head would you find it funny?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre
The man who sent an army to kill and rape people in your country?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Poland
The man who planned to crash a nation by starving it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
You know, people from your history lessons actually lived like you and I do and some of them still do, as do their families.
Re: Tile: A New Language for Machine Learning
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since when was terseness a bad thing?
Immediately after you are tasked to maintain said overly-clever and overly-terse code.
What is the name of the language where the whole game of life was literally one line of code? That was the example that convinced me that terseness can be too much.
also some physical theories which are summarised as A=F(P) Anterior=Factor(Posterior) , the future is a function of the past.
the difference to E=MCC is that the later one actually contains physical entities and that 'Factor' is often not well defined.