Richard Miller wrote:
It's easy to write good code that will take advantage of arbitrarily many
processors to run faster / smoother, if you have a proper language for the
task.
... and if you can find a way around Amdahl's law (qv).
http://www.cis.temple.edu/~shi/docs/amdahl/amdahl.html
There is a vast range of applications that cannot
be managed in real time using existing single-core technology.
I'm sorry to interrupt your discussion, but what is real time?
On Thu Oct 15 06:55:24 EDT 2009, s...@nipl.net wrote:
task. With respect to Ken, Bill Gates said something along the lines of who
would need more than 640K?.
on the other hand, there were lots of people using computers with 4mb
of memory when bill gates said this. it was quite easy to see how
On Thu Oct 15 08:01:29 EDT 2009, w...@conducive.org wrote:
Richard Miller wrote:
It's easy to write good code that will take advantage of arbitrarily many
processors to run faster / smoother, if you have a proper language for the
task.
... and if you can find a way around Amdahl's law
On Thu Oct 15 09:41:29 EDT 2009, 9f...@hamnavoe.com wrote:
in fact, i believe i used an apple ][ around
that time that had ~744k.
Are you sure that was an apple II? When I bought mine I remember
wrestling with the decision over whether to get the standard 48k of
RAM or upgrade to the full
in fact, i believe i used an apple ][ around
that time that had ~744k.
Are you sure that was an apple II? When I bought mine I remember
wrestling with the decision over whether to get the standard 48k of
RAM or upgrade to the full 64k. This was long before the IBM PC.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:11 AM, hiro 23h...@googlemail.com wrote:
There is a vast range of applications that cannot
be managed in real time using existing single-core technology.
I'm sorry to interrupt your discussion, but what is real time?
Real time just means fast enough to work
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:52 AM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.netwrote:
On Thu Oct 15 09:41:29 EDT 2009, 9f...@hamnavoe.com wrote:
in fact, i believe i used an apple ][ around
that time that had ~744k.
Are you sure that was an apple II? When I bought mine I remember
wrestling
Well, since Russ is silent (and since this is not the first time this
question has come up: http://9fans.net/archive/2008/05/401) here's
a reliable link for anybody who might still be interested:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060308015519/http://project-iris.net/isw-2003/papers/sit.pdf
it sounds like the kernel (L4-like, supposedly tuned to the specific
hardware) and the monitor (userland, portable) are shared, from
the paper.
I'm confused what you mean by shared.
ugh, I completely botched that.. I meant replicated not shared.
-eric
Tim Newsham
I think this is an interesting approach.
There are several interesting ideas being pursued here. The focus of
the discussion has been on the multikernel approach, which I think has
merit.
Something that has not been discussed here is the wide use of DSLs for
systems programming, and using
i am pretty sure you would find almost all the publications
by googling for the title of each.
that would require knowing the titles for each.
- erik
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:38 AM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
i'd be happy to read δ more and be ε less ignorant
(i suppose that doesn't help with the large H),
but it seems that http://ramp.eecs.berkeley.edu/
is missing in action. does anyone have more precise
references so
The RAMP stuff is still very active.
http://ramp.eecs.berkeley.edu/ works from my phone. You an also check
with the other partners (Derrick Chiou at University of Texas).
However, RAMP is primarily architecture focused. There actually was
an Inferno port to the ramp405 board.
Also try:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=enq=RAMP+berkeley
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 15, 2009, at 2:46 PM, Abhishek Kulkarni abbyzc...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:38 AM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net
wrote:
i'd be happy to read δ more and be ε less ignorant
Now I remember this paper. Was the code ever released anywhere?
ron
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:32 PM, ron minnich rminn...@gmail.com wrote:
Now I remember this paper. Was the code ever released anywhere?
There was no real code to speak of. It was a draft of a draft.
I did some calculations of block-level commonality using a
few trivial programs that hashed each
17 matches
Mail list logo
