Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

CPColin posted:

*thinks about a piece of unwritten code* "wow it's beautiful"
*writes it* "aw man not again"

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

my god, is there some assumption that we're double checking posts around here??

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

tinaun posted:

rust used to have a rule where no keyword or std type should have a name longer than 5 letters, so you had ret for return and loop instead of continue (and even sillier stuff like iface instead of trait)
normally im unqualified to have an opinion but ive checked it a few times and 'trait' is 5 letters?

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...
software downloadable content

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...
one of my favorite lines from a giant postmortem was "there was a point when IC's stopped believing in the overall schedule" because I could've narrowed when that switch flipped for me down to a week, possibly a day

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

i am honestly perplexed why you'd be especially doubtful. not that cl is some panacea, but it does not seem that hard to improve on verilog, and starting from a language with excellent macro facilities seems a good plan?

HDL's are writing a description of a circuit, what particular strengths of lisp would lend well to it?

in the context of "improve on verilog" my first step would be to check out system verilog, SVTB, OVM, you know the actual improvements to the language, tooling, ecosystem based on practitioner feedback over the past few decades? like making named argument lists into bundles was one of those whack-whole-class-of-bug improvements at the time. but sure, lisp with it's quick preference for infinite recursion, makes sense too

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

Zlodo posted:

can't wait circa ten years from now when horribly large piles of poo poo built with it turn up everywhere

8 years ago i worked on an embedded product where the testbench GUI was written in excel

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

yeah, it might not be a good idea even medium-term, but to just knock out a macro assembler for initial experiments it actually sounds like a pretty sane workflow, and uses excel features largely as intended.
idk it sounds to me like one EE cobbled together the MVP to avoid talking to some software nerd, at which point the tech debt fairy immediately transmuted it into the POR flow with no time to make anything better. even cell-shading "you scheduled a multiply on an adder" wouldn't take much implementation

you might be able to find worse in GPU land. there's only like ~5 global teams that build them, it's all incestuous tribal knowledge bouncing around and plenty of "its our driver talking to our FW talking to our HW" where you can really hide some ghastly edge cases with "dont do that"

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

Cybernetic Vermin posted:

otherwise there is presumably some way (on a "real" avx-512 cpu) of regaining this 2k of register file wasted in a thread that has once run a bit of avx but no longer cares about the register content?

iirc "no"

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

BobHoward posted:

as forsyth mentions, intel management was just hostile to gpus. even using larrabee for graphics was politically difficult; not only did it ultimately get killed but as forsyth mentions, intel's regular gpu team was on a leash and not allowed to even try to build something bigger. (there was likely no technical limitation preventing them from scaling up, by their nature gpus scale up with relative ease)

ehhhhh idk about this? kinda loses the thread

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...
this is super old but honestly it strikes me as the kind of thing where windows wouldn't even boot if you weren't doing that part right

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

FlapYoJacks posted:

c will exist so long as kernels, bare metal, and RTOS’ exist. Which is forever.
yeah most of the folks hepped up on memory safety are somewhere between blissfully ignorant and actively hostile towards these existing

that said, idk it's not nearly as relevant as the FFI stuff

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

gonadic io posted:

what on earth

weren't you one of less than five (5) humans on earth trying to do basic bare metal cortex m3 bringup with rust and hitting all sorts of issues?

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

gonadic io posted:

like, 4 years ago yeah. things are 100x better now including linux kernel contributions in rust approved by linus, like 5 different fully featured rtoses that exist.
bare metal doesn't even involve nightly any more, and depending on what abstraction you want possibly not even unsafe anymore either if you access the mmio from through one of the rtos's libs

alright? i dont think this situation requires the breathless surprised you feigned at the outset that "MOST" folks banging on about this poo poo don't work in embedded and don't think about it

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

BobHoward posted:

e.g. one of the lessons of risc is that more than one memory reference per instruction is Bad
yes... but did they take it too far??

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

Athas posted:

I had a PL experience last week. I was external examiner at a university, for a project course where the students had to design and implement their own language from scratch. This is in many ways an ill conceived idea, as these are second year students who have seen only C#, Java, and maybe a bit of Javascript. ...

back in school (in the dark ages) I took an ISA class somewhere in the 300 range for the EE track

one assignment was optimizing a layout, like how big and how many sets/ways should the icache vs. dcache be, how many gates on the branch target buffer, etc. and apparently so many students complained that they didn't "get to design their own ISA" that the prof felt a need to address it. he explained that like... maybe a dozen architects get to do that greenfield fresh ISA design ever in their careers, optimization is a heck of a lot easier to grade, and you'd probably gently caress up real ISA design anyway

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...
my knowledge is hopelessly out of date, but I recall the x87 registers having a huge penalty? perhaps it's just when you try to switch back and forth between that and the XMM/YMM stuff, but I really thought that nuked the pipeline at some point

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...
big v6 fan here, v6 is always the best

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

BobHoward posted:

leaving the past behind might happen sooner than you think

we're now nearly 25 years since amd proposed x86-64, 20 since it became commercially available, everyone runs a 64-bit OS now, and 16-bit code is so far in the rearview mirror that anyone who cares can just run it in an emulator

so, intel recently published a proposal for x86-s, a new version of x86 which removes the legacy bullshit nobody has needed for aeons. x86-s doesn't support anything but 64-bit mode (note, it can still run 32-bit userspace code since that's baked into x86-64 in a clean-for-x86 way, but the OS itself must be 64-bit). it also shitcans instruction prefixes which force 16-bit addressing even in 32- or 64-bit code, removes call gates, simplifies segmentation, axes virtual 8086 (rip 5150), and much more

of course even if intel manages to get buy-in from microsoft and ships this anytime soon, i have no doubt that the pc industry will respond by baking an emulator for all the legacy stuff into the CSM, so yay! 5150 lives!

BobHoward posted:

leaving the past behind might happen sooner than you think

BobHoward posted:

even if intel manages to get buy-in from microsoft
lol
holdin my breath here

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

akadajet posted:

I mean. it’s happened before for amd64. and windows has been built for different cpus for a long time now

jumping to a new thing isn't the same as not requiring support for the old thing

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...

leper khan posted:

A lot better tbh

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

JawnV6
Jul 4, 2004

So hot ...
having a hard time reading the python complaints from a few pages back as someone who used to get paid to maintain perl written by EE's

"oooh my modules took me an hour to sort out file paths"

there were functions with no call sites, they'd just bodge up the name on the spot and eval() it. you'd weep

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply