Walter Bright:
Making SIMD code that delivers performance turns out to be a
highly quirky and subtle exercise, one that is resistant to
formalization.
I have written some SIMD code, with mixed results, so I
understand part of such problems, despite my total experience on
such things is limi
On 10/25/2012 4:13 AM, bearophile wrote:
> Manu:
>
>> I think this is far more convenient than any crazy 'if' syntax :) .. It's
>> also perfectly optimal on all architectures I know aswell!
>
> You should show more respect for them and their work. Their ideas seem very
far
> from being crazy. The
On 10/25/12 7:13 AM, bearophile wrote:
Manu:
I think this is far more convenient than any crazy 'if' syntax :) .. It's
also perfectly optimal on all architectures I know aswell!
You should show more respect for them and their work. Their ideas seem
very far from being crazy. They have also pr
On 25 October 2012 14:13, bearophile wrote:
> Manu:
>
>
> I think this is far more convenient than any crazy 'if' syntax :) .. It's
>> also perfectly optimal on all architectures I know aswell!
>>
>
> You should show more respect for them and their work. Their ideas seem
> very far from being cr
Manu:
I think this is far more convenient than any crazy 'if' syntax
:) .. It's
also perfectly optimal on all architectures I know aswell!
You should show more respect for them and their work. Their ideas
seem very far from being crazy. They have also proved their type
system to be sound. T
On 25 October 2012 13:38, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On 25 October 2012 09:36, Manu wrote:
> > On 25 October 2012 02:18, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25 October 2012 00:16, Manu wrote:
> >> > On 25 October 2012 02:01, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 24 October 2012 23:46, Manu wrote:
> >>
On 25 October 2012 09:36, Manu wrote:
> On 25 October 2012 02:18, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 25 October 2012 00:16, Manu wrote:
>> > On 25 October 2012 02:01, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 24 October 2012 23:46, Manu wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Let's consider your example above for instance, I w
On 25 October 2012 00:16, Manu wrote:
> On 25 October 2012 02:01, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> On 24 October 2012 23:46, Manu wrote:
>>
>> > Let's consider your example above for instance, I would rewrite (given
>> > existing syntax):
>> >
>> > // vector length of context = 1; current_mask = T
>> >
On 24 October 2012 23:46, Manu wrote:
> On 25 October 2012 01:00, bearophile wrote:
>>
>> Manu:
>>
>>
>>> The compiler would have to do some serious magic to optimise that;
>>> flattening both sides of the if into parallel expressions, and then
>>> applying the mask to combine...
>>
>>
>> I think
On 25 October 2012 01:00, bearophile wrote:
> Manu:
>
>
> The compiler would have to do some serious magic to optimise that;
>> flattening both sides of the if into parallel expressions, and then
>> applying the mask to combine...
>>
>
> I think it's a small amount of magic.
>
> The simple featu
Manu:
The compiler would have to do some serious magic to optimise
that;
flattening both sides of the if into parallel expressions, and
then applying the mask to combine...
I think it's a small amount of magic.
The simple features shown in that paper are fully focused on SIMD
programming, s
On 24 October 2012 18:12, jerro wrote:
> Simple example:
>> T opCompound(string seq)(T a, T b, T c) if(seq == "* +") { return
>> _madd(a, b, c); }
>>
>
> It may be useful to have a way to define compound operators for other
> things (although you can already write expression templates), but th
Manu wrote:
One thing I can think of that would really improve simd (and
not only simd)
would be a way to define compound operators.
If the library could detect/hook sequences of operations and
implement them
more efficiently as a compound, that would make some very
powerful
optimisations ava
On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 at 12:47:38 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Paulo Pinto:
Actually, I am yet to see any language that has SIMD as part
of the language standard and not as an extension where each
vendor does its own way.
D is, or is going to be, one such language :-)
Bye,
bearophile
Is
Simple example:
T opCompound(string seq)(T a, T b, T c) if(seq == "* +") {
return
_madd(a, b, c); }
It may be useful to have a way to define compound operators for
other things (although you can already write expression
templates), but this is an optimization that the compiler back
end ca
On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 at 12:50:44 UTC, Manu wrote:
On 24 October 2012 15:39, Paulo Pinto
wrote:
On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 at 02:41:53 UTC, bearophile
wrote:
I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for
Portable SIMD
Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian H
On 24/10/12 11:33, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10/24/2012 11:24 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
On 24/10/12 04:41, bearophile wrote:
I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for Portable
SIMD Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian Hack and Ingo Wald:
http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.de/proje
Manu:
D already has what's required to do some fairly nice (by
comparison) simd stuff with good supporting libraries.
After reading that paper I am not sure you are right. See how
their language manages masks by itself. This is from page 3:
// vector length of context = 1; current_mask = T
On 24 October 2012 15:39, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 at 02:41:53 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>
>> I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for Portable SIMD
>> Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian Hack and Ingo Wald:
>>
>> http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.**d
Paulo Pinto:
Actually, I am yet to see any language that has SIMD as part of
the language standard and not as an extension where each vendor
does its own way.
D is, or is going to be, one such language :-)
Bye,
bearophile
On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 at 02:41:53 UTC, bearophile wrote:
I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for
Portable SIMD Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian
Hack and Ingo Wald:
http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.de/projects/vecimp/vecimp_tr.pdf
SIMD programming is necessa
Don Clugston:
Making that an error was such a good idea.
There are two other common sources of bugs code that I'd like to
see removed from D code:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5409
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8757
Bye,
bearophile
On 10/24/2012 11:24 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
On 24/10/12 04:41, bearophile wrote:
I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for Portable
SIMD Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian Hack and Ingo Wald:
http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.de/projects/vecimp/vecimp_tr.pdf
They pres
On 24/10/12 04:41, bearophile wrote:
I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for Portable
SIMD Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian Hack and Ingo Wald:
http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.de/projects/vecimp/vecimp_tr.pdf
They present a simple scalar program in C:
struct dat
I have found a nice paper, "Extending a C-like Language for
Portable SIMD Programming", (2012), by Roland L., Sebastian Hack
and Ingo Wald:
http://www.cdl.uni-saarland.de/projects/vecimp/vecimp_tr.pdf
SIMD programming is necessary in a system language, or in any
language that wants to use the
25 matches
Mail list logo
