Why so little parallelism?
|
From: BDH on 1 Nov 2006 22:37 I am enthusiastic over humanity's extraordinary and sometimes very timely ingenuities. If you are in a shipwreck and all the boats are gone, a piano top buoyant enough to keep you afloat may come along and make a fortuitous life preserver. This is not to say, though, that the best way to design a life preserver is in the form of a piano top. I think we are clinging to a great many piano tops in accepting yesterday's fortuitous contrivings as constituting the only means for solving a given problem.â?¨- R. Buckminster Fuller
From: BDH on 1 Nov 2006 22:38 > >[...] Let's put our code in objects because...I don't > >know, some guy thinks without justification that it will make X easier! > > Shirley, you're not serious. Maybe I'm biased - I hate Java. When people see things as beautiful, â?¨ugliness is created. â?¨When people see things as good, â?¨evil is created. -Tao Te Ching
From: BDH on 2 Nov 2006 00:27 So how do you build and move to a boat while sitting on a piano top? Welllll, first we assume a sufficiently smart corporation, then we assume a sufficiently smart compiler, then we assume sufficiently smart developers...
From: Andrew Reilly on 2 Nov 2006 00:50 On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 21:27:06 -0800, BDH wrote: > So how do you build and move to a boat while sitting on a piano top? > Welllll, first we assume a sufficiently smart corporation, then we > assume a sufficiently smart compiler, then we assume sufficiently smart > developers... How are the developers, however smart, going to express their algorithms without introducing sequential dependencies, however inadvertently? (What is an algorithm, without sequential dependencies?) Don't you need an appropriate language, and perhaps a plausible parallel machine abstraction, before you start on the compiler? How would your language be different from Verilog or VHDL or Occam? What would be different, this time? Or are you, perhaps, hinting at the "High Productivity" DARPA project, or one of Sun, IBM or Cray's sub-projects, each of which, I assume, has working answers to my previous questions? Cheers, -- Andrew
From: Richard on 2 Nov 2006 01:33
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] "BDH" <bhauth(a)gmail.com> spake the secret code <1162438715.331466.142640(a)h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> thusly: >> >[...] Let's put our code in objects because...I don't >> >know, some guy thinks without justification that it will make X easier! >> >> Shirley, you're not serious. > >Maybe I'm biased - I hate Java. That's like saying you think procedural programming sucks because you hate Pascal. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html> |