41–50 of 61 posts
See also: https://ispc.github.io/
ISPC is great software. It's a shame in many ways Intel didn't put more resources behind it.
https://pharr.org/matt/blog/2018/04/30/ispc-all if you don't want to follow the comment link again :).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You've continued to post aggressively, attacking other users and generally posting in the flamewar style, even though we've asked you many times to stop. If this keeps up, we're going to have to ban you. I don't want to ban you, because you obviously have a lot of knowledge to share, but your aggressiveness destroys more than your knowledge contributes—a lot more, actually. Fortunately, there are plenty of other know…
> Please be like them instead.
Be an arrogant martinet? No thanks. But I'll stop posting so congrats on keeping your community homogeneously obnoxious (and ignorant).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've continued to post aggressively, attacking other users and generally posting in the flamewar style, even though we've asked you many times to stop. If this keeps up, we're going to have to ban you. I don't want to ban you, because you obviously have a lot of knowledge to share, but your aggressiveness destroys more than your knowledge contributes—a lot more, actually. Fortunately, there are plenty of other know…
It pointless trying to abide by your rules of decorum - I call a thing a rant - as if it isn't and that makes me aggressive? In reality you're just mad I pointed out your kafka-esque moderation policies. > Please be like them instead. Be an arrogant martinet? No thanks. But I'll stop posting so congrats on keeping your community homogeneously obnoxious (and ignorant).
This isn't a response to just one comment, let alone one word, but to the pattern of your comments in general: they stand out as nasty, abusive towards other commenters, and not in the intended spirit of the site; not just by a little, but a lot. It's not a borderline call.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It pointless trying to abide by your rules of decorum - I call a thing a rant - as if it isn't and that makes me aggressive? In reality you're just mad I pointed out your kafka-esque moderation policies. > Please be like them instead. Be an arrogant martinet? No thanks. But I'll stop posting so congrats on keeping your community homogeneously obnoxious (and ignorant).
I don't remember anything you pointed out about moderation, and in any case we don't ban accounts for criticizing the mods. This isn't a response to just one comment, let alone one word, but to the pattern of your comments in general: they stand out as nasty, abusive towards other commenters, and not in the intended spirit of the site; not just by a little, but a lot. It's not a borderline call.
Isn't this already implemented in QEMU?
"Show HN: SimSIMD vs SciPy: How AVX-512 and SVE make SIMD nicer and ML 10x faster" (2023-10) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37805810
I helped make a really cursed RISC-V version of this for a class project last year! The idea was to first compile each program to WASM using clang, and lower the WASM back to C but this time with all opcodes implemented in terms of the RISC-V vector intrinsics. That was a hack to be sure, but a surprisingly elegant one since 1. WASM's structured control flow maps really well to lane masking 2. Stack and local values…
This so-called GPU programming model has existed many decades before the appearance of the first GPUs, but at that time the compilers were not so good like the CUDA compilers, so the burden for a programmer was greater. As another poster has already mentioned, there exists a compiler for CPUs which has been inspired by CUDA and which has been available for many years: ISPC (Implicit SPMD Program Compiler), at https:/…
DirectX 8 added programmable shaders as we mostly know it today in 2000 with directx 9's shader model 2.0 really solidifying things in 2002. CUDA didn't show up until 2007.
Two major examples,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMS34010
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RenderMan_Shading_Language
Also in DirectX 8, it wasn't as we know them today, because Assembly was the only programming language.
Nowadays CUDA does C, C++, Fortran, Python JIT in the box, and has partner collaborations for Haskell, Java, Julia, C#.
Hey, AVX-512 again! "Show HN: SimSIMD vs SciPy: How AVX-512 and SVE make SIMD nicer and ML 10x faster" (2023-10) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37805810
This so-called GPU programming model has existed many decades before the appearance of the first GPUs, but at that time the compilers were not so good like the CUDA compilers, so the burden for a programmer was greater. As another poster has already mentioned, there exists a compiler for CPUs which has been inspired by CUDA and which has been available for many years: ISPC (Implicit SPMD Program Compiler), at https:/…
SIMT and SIMD are different things. It's fortunate that they have different names. A GPU is a single instruction multiple data machine. That's what the predicated vector operations are. 32 floats at a time, each with a disable bit. Cuda is a single instruction multiple thread language. You write code in terms of one float and branching on booleans, as if it was a CPU, with some awkward intrinsics for accessing the ve…
From the user side, it is probably simpler to write an algorithm once without vectors, and have a compiler translate it to every vector ISA it supports, rather than to deal with each ISA by hand.
Besides, in many situations, having the algorithm executed sequentially or in parallel is irrelevant to the algorithm itself, so why introduce that concern?
> I'm certainly in the minority opinion here.
There are definitely more userland programmers than compiler/numerical library ones.