51–60 of 64 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the Commonwealth we say maths but we still say code. I've noticed we also tend to also write "computer program" the US way, despite writing "TV programme".
Yup, British-educated here: programme for sequences of activities, program for the thing the computer runs... it’s just a little oddity I’ve noticed I’ve picked up and seem to be quite consistently applying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the Commonwealth we say maths but we still say code. I've noticed we also tend to also write "computer program" the US way, despite writing "TV programme".
Yup, British-educated here: programme for sequences of activities, program for the thing the computer runs... it’s just a little oddity I’ve noticed I’ve picked up and seem to be quite consistently applying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And not without meaning. HPC people hold themselves to higher standards than the average Joes throwing stuff at the currently-fashionable "continuous integration server" until the lights turn green. "Codes" are often things that have been proven, written on a legal pad, typed into the machine, and finally validated on a set of test problems. Could you prove that your program has second-order numerical stability? http…
A shining example of the Dunning–Kruger effect. Scientific code is some of the worst-engineered code you'll ever deal with because it's written by people that are great at physics but terrible at software engineering. It will be poorly documented, have single letter var names everywhere without comments, have a bunch of hidden dependencies on whatever the postdoc had installed on his/her laptop, leak memory but 'term…
> Oh, and there will almost never be even a single regression test.
Bullshit. "Codes" tend to be run against analytical and/or experimental results.
This web page is also the first I've heard of Halide and Polyhedral Compilation. This is exciting to me because I've been working on relational (database) data and logic comprehensions, and in a case of convergent evolution Halide looks a lot like my notation and Polyhedral Compilation looks much like diagrams I've been drawing on my whiteboard. Where can I learn more on this?
This web page is also the first I've heard of Halide and Polyhedral Compilation. This is exciting to me because I've been working on relational (database) data and logic comprehensions, and in a case of convergent evolution Halide looks a lot like my notation and Polyhedral Compilation looks much like diagrams I've been drawing on my whiteboard. Where can I learn more on this?
By raising from C you don't need to use or learn a new language. Or one can generate C from a succinct notation or framework, and polyhedral optimize from there. That is what was in the R-Stream-TF paper.
This web page is also the first I've heard of Halide and Polyhedral Compilation. This is exciting to me because I've been working on relational (database) data and logic comprehensions, and in a case of convergent evolution Halide looks a lot like my notation and Polyhedral Compilation looks much like diagrams I've been drawing on my whiteboard. Where can I learn more on this?
I could not find how to integrate this into a C++ program. Does it need ATen or is there a lower level of integration? Is there even the possibility of getting C bindings?
C bindings don't seem to be a priority.
Feel free to use the contacts provided in the documentation here: https://facebookresearch.github.io/TensorComprehensions/cont....
Out of curiosity, is there any overlap with objectives or performance of accelerate https://github.com/AccelerateHS/accelerate ?