> I'd rather have a couple of real-world number crunchers comment
> on the Cell, frankly.
Unfortunately, the Cell was designed specifically for gaming. So if game
devs don't think it meets their needs, that's a bad sign.
> All game dev punks can think of is how to render
> more and prettier polygons
Wrong. Among many other things, we do extensive GOFAI (including minimax
and pathfinding), collision detection, audio processing, and physical
simulation. Several of these are about as ideal candidates for the Cell as
you're likely to find.
> preferrably without throwing away their old codebase.
I'll say it again: if you don't understand why this matters, you simply
don't understand how making real software works. Given a choice between
writing new code and re-writing old code, real programmers strongly prefer
the former.
> "Parallel programming and debugging is hard". Well, no shit, Sherlock.
> Get used to it while there's time.
The point is, there needs to be a payoff. If programming the Cell was
harder, but gave 3x performance, nobody would be whining. We're whining
because it's harder and gives 1x performance.
> Local-connectivity integer automata networks and large scale MD would
> run just fine on SPEs.
Do you know of any real programmers (ie, people who get paid real money for
solving real problems) who've actually used the Cell and believe that?
-mattb
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
