Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)

#1

Post by _feynon » Mon, Oct 28, 2024, 6:47 PM UTC

Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)
petewarden.com

Re: Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)

#2

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 28, 2024, 9:00 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)

#3

Post by dang » Mon, Oct 28, 2024, 9:28 PM UTC

Discussed (a bit) at the time:

Why are ML Compilers so Hard? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29675422 - Dec 2021 (2 comments)

Re: Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)

#4

Post by tmtvl » Mon, Oct 28, 2024, 9:38 PM UTC

Oh, machine learning, I was hoping it was about ML (Meta Language) compilers with insights on stuff like Ocaml or SML.

Re: Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)

#5

Post by Yoric » Mon, Oct 28, 2024, 10:25 PM UTC

tmtvl wrote: post #4

Oh, machine learning, I was hoping it was about ML (Meta Language) compilers with insights on stuff like Ocaml or SML.

Well, these ML compilers are pretty simple, actually :)

Re: Why are ML compilers so hard? (2021)

#6

Post by pentaphobe » Tue, Oct 29, 2024, 4:59 AM UTC

tmtvl wrote: post #4

Oh, machine learning, I was hoping it was about ML (Meta Language) compilers with insights on stuff like Ocaml or SML.

Right? Had (brief) moment of joy at seeing it used in a non-deep-learning context, alas..

Digression: perhaps a retaliation is in order for all the name overloading caused by the AI gold rush? We could start calling Meta Languages "Deep Lingos", "Gnostic Abstract Interfaces", "Generalised Programmable Types"