On Thursday, 10 December 2020 at 14:49:08 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Thursday, 10 December 2020 at 11:07:06 UTC, Igor Shirkalin
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
"no need to calculate inverse matrix" What? Since when?
Since when highly optimized algorithms are
On Thursday, 10 December 2020 at 11:07:06 UTC, Igor Shirkalin
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
"no need to calculate inverse matrix" What? Since when?
Since when highly optimized algorithms are required. This does
not mean that you should not know the
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:07:23 UTC, 9il wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 12:28:39 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 02:14:41 UTC, 9il wrote:
I don't know. Tensors aren't so complex. The complex part is
a design that allows Mir to construct and iterate
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:54:26 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:48:51 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:41:17 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
[snip]
"no need to calculate
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:41:17 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 11:21:16 UTC, Igor Shirkalin
wrote:
[snip]
Agreed. As a matter of fact the simplest convolutions of
tensors are out of date. It is
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:54:26 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:48:51 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:41:17 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grostad wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
[snip]
"no need to calculate
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 11:21:16 UTC, Igor Shirkalin
wrote:
[snip]
Agreed. As a matter of fact the simplest convolutions of
tensors are out of date. It is like there's no need to
calculate inverse matrix. Mir is the usefull work
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:48:51 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:41:17 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
[snip]
"no need to calculate inverse matrix" What? Since when?
I dont know what he meant in this
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:41:17 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad
wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
[snip]
"no need to calculate inverse matrix" What? Since when?
I dont know what he meant in this context, but a common
technique in computer graphics is to build
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 13:17:47 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 11:21:16 UTC, Igor Shirkalin
wrote:
[snip]
Agreed. As a matter of fact the simplest convolutions of
tensors are out of date. It is like there's no need to
calculate inverse matrix. Mir is the usefull work
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 11:21:16 UTC, Igor Shirkalin wrote:
[snip]
Agreed. As a matter of fact the simplest convolutions of
tensors are out of date. It is like there's no need to
calculate inverse matrix. Mir is the usefull work for author,
of course, and practically almost not used.
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 12:28:39 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 02:14:41 UTC, 9il wrote:
I don't know. Tensors aren't so complex. The complex part is a
design that allows Mir to construct and iterate various kinds
of lazy tensors of any complexity and have
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 02:14:41 UTC, 9il wrote:
I don't know. Tensors aren't so complex. The complex part is a
design that allows Mir to construct and iterate various kinds
of lazy tensors of any complexity and have quite a universal
API, and all of these are boosted by the fact that
On Monday, 7 December 2020 at 02:14:41 UTC, 9il wrote:
On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 17:30:13 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
On Saturday, 5 December 2020 at 07:44:33 UTC, 9il wrote:
sweep_ndslice uses (2*N - 1) arrays to index U, this allows
LDC to unroll the loop.
I don't know. Tensors
On Sunday, 6 December 2020 at 17:30:13 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
On Saturday, 5 December 2020 at 07:44:33 UTC, 9il wrote:
sweep_ndslice uses (2*N - 1) arrays to index U, this allows
LDC to unroll the loop.
For example, for 2D case, withNeighboursSum [2] will store the
pointer to the
On Saturday, 5 December 2020 at 07:44:33 UTC, 9il wrote:
sweep_ndslice uses (2*N - 1) arrays to index U, this allows LDC
to unroll the loop.
For example, for 2D case, withNeighboursSum [2] will store the
pointer to the result, and the pointer at rows above and below.
matrix:
On Saturday, 5 December 2020 at 07:04:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:50:39 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:27:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
[...]
Hi Ilya,
Thanks a lot for sharing the update. I am currently working on
porting a python package called
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 20:26:17 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 14:48:32 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
It looks like all the `sweep_XXX` functions are only defined
for contiguous slices, as that would be the default if define
a Slice!(T, N).
How the functions access
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 03:48:15 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/3/2020 8:27 AM, 9il wrote:
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1]
has been boosted [2] with Mir-like implementations.
This is really great! Can you write an article about it? Such
would be really
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 02:35:49 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 21:28:04 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
Am I correct in assuming that the data in the NDSlice is also a
single array?
sweep_ndslice uses (2*N - 1) arrays to index U, this allows LDC
to unroll the loop.
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 17:08:58 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:27:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
Looks good, but a few typos:
Thanks!
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:50:39 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:27:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
Hi all,
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1]
has been boosted [2] with Mir-like implementations.
D+Mir:
1. is more abstract than NumPy
2.
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 20:26:17 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
[snip]
I see, looking at some of the code, field case is literally
doing the indexing calculation right there. I guess ndslice is
doing the same thing just with "Mir magic" an in the
background? Still, ndslice is able to get
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 14:48:32 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
It looks like all the `sweep_XXX` functions are only defined
for contiguous slices, as that would be the default if define a
Slice!(T, N).
How the functions access the data is a big difference. If you
compare the `sweep_field`
On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 02:35:49 UTC, data pulverizer wrote:
[snip]
NDSlice is even faster for this case - cool. Am I correct in
assuming that the data in the NDSlice is also a single array?
It looks like all the `sweep_XXX` functions are only defined for
contiguous slices, as that
On 12/3/2020 8:27 AM, 9il wrote:
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1] has been boosted [2]
with Mir-like implementations.
This is really great! Can you write an article about it? Such would be really
helpful in letting people know about it.
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 21:28:04 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
The document says:
Slice: Python like. Uses D Slices and Strides for grouping
(Red-Black).
Naive: one for-loop for each dimension. Matrix-Access via
multi-dimensional Array.
Field: one for-loop. Matrix is flattened. Access
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 21:28:04 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
The document says:
Slice: Python like. Uses D Slices and Strides for grouping
(Red-Black).
Naive: one for-loop for each dimension. Matrix-Access via
multi-dimensional Array.
Field: one for-loop. Matrix is flattened. Access
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 21:28:04 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 20:25:11 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
[snip]
Very interesting work. What is the difference between Mir's
field, slice, native and ndslice? [...]
The document says:
Slice: Python like. Uses D
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 20:25:11 UTC, data pulverizer
wrote:
[snip]
Very interesting work. What is the difference between Mir's
field, slice, native and ndslice? [...]
The document says:
Slice: Python like. Uses D Slices and Strides for grouping
(Red-Black).
Naive: one
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:27:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
Hi all,
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1] has
been boosted [2] with Mir-like implementations.
... [SNIP]
Kind regards,
Ilya
Very interesting work. What is the difference between Mir's
field, slice, native
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:27:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
Hi all,
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1] has
been boosted [2] with Mir-like implementations.
D+Mir:
1. is more abstract than NumPy
2. requires less code for multidimensional algorithms
3. doesn't require
On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:27:59 UTC, 9il wrote:
Hi all,
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1] has
been boosted [2] with Mir-like implementations.
D+Mir:
1. is more abstract than NumPy
2. requires less code for multidimensional algorithms
3. doesn't require
Hi all,
Since the first announcement [0] the original benchmark [1] has
been boosted [2] with Mir-like implementations.
D+Mir:
1. is more abstract than NumPy
2. requires less code for multidimensional algorithms
3. doesn't require indexing
4. uses recursion across dimensions
5. a few
Thanks for all of your feedback!
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 13:14:37 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
It's been a while since I've used numba, so I was a little
confused on the numba 1 and numba 8 runs.
The number was meant as the number of used threads in our runs.
The prefix 'numba' is indicating
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 15:20:19 UTC, 9il wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 13:14:37 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 10:05:06 UTC, Tobias Schmidt
wrote:
It also looks like you are compiling on ldc with -mcpu=native
--boundscheck=off. Why not -O as well?
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 15:20:19 UTC, 9il wrote:
[snip]
-O is added by DUB
Ah, the -release-nobounds
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 10:05:06 UTC, Tobias Schmidt
wrote:
Dear all,
to compare MIR and Numpy in the HPC context, we implemented a
multigrid solver in Python using Numpy and in D using Mir and
perforemd some benchmarks with them.
You can find our code and results here:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 13:14:37 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 10:05:06 UTC, Tobias Schmidt
wrote:
It also looks like you are compiling on ldc with -mcpu=native
--boundscheck=off. Why not -O as well?
-O is added by DUB
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 13:01:42 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo
wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 10:05:06 UTC, Tobias Schmidt
wrote:
Dear all,
to compare MIR and Numpy in the HPC context, we implemented a
multigrid solver in Python using Numpy and in D using Mir and
perforemd some
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 10:05:06 UTC, Tobias Schmidt
wrote:
Dear all,
to compare MIR and Numpy in the HPC context, we implemented a
multigrid solver in Python using Numpy and in D using Mir and
perforemd some benchmarks with them.
You can find our code and results here:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2020 at 10:05:06 UTC, Tobias Schmidt
wrote:
Dear all,
to compare MIR and Numpy in the HPC context, we implemented a
multigrid solver in Python using Numpy and in D using Mir and
perforemd some benchmarks with them.
You can find our code and results here:
Dear all,
to compare MIR and Numpy in the HPC context, we implemented a
multigrid solver in Python using Numpy and in D using Mir and
perforemd some benchmarks with them.
You can find our code and results here:
https://github.com/typohnebild/numpy-vs-mir
Feedback is very welcome. Please
43 matches
Mail list logo
