Hi- Thanks Michael for the reply. I agree that I do not perceive an MLIR dialect significantly helping a current Chapel user. As you have rightly pointed, I was coming more from the angle of an ML programmer who may be interested in using Chapel (or Chapel-like syntax/semantics) to target a modern hardware accelerator built for ML (many of them resemble distributed meshes). In which case an MLIR dialect may help map the Chapel syntax/semantics to the target hardware more efficiently.
-Thx Dibyendu -----Original Message----- From: Michael Ferguson <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 7:40 PM To: Das, Dibyendu <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Chapel-developers] Chapel and MLIR Hi - Creating an MLIR dialect is worth considering. I think that conceptually, MLIR is a reasonable fit. It's less clear to me if in practice the MLIR code base and community will be ready for other use cases besides tensorflow. To some degree I'd like to see how it goes with f18. However, most of the benefits I can imagine of using MLIR or something like it are at the level of making the compiler easier to write. I wasn't aware of situations in which MLIR would significantly change the experience of a Chapel user (as compared to, say, other approaches to encode Chapel semantics into LLVM IR). Do you know of such a case, where having some MLIR integration would make a difference for somebody using Chapel? Thanks, -michael Hi- Is there any plan of creating an MLIR dialect for Chapel ? Because I think such an effort may be useful in making Chapel a programming language that is useful for machine learning - especially for training on distributed hardware. Thx -Dibyendu _______________________________________________ Chapel-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-developers
