Hi Devon, I agree that Bob’s ideas should be considered. The idea is not to create a unique organisation or replace existing web sites, but to facilitate the linkages among the different web sites and improve communications. Also, there are at least two other venues not currently covered that may be promising: organization of webinars, and development of efficient means of internet communications among organizations and users.
Guy From: Devon McCormick [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: March 10, 2016 01:16 PM To: Robert Bernecky Cc: LaRocque, Guy (NRCan/RNCan); [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Improving the visibility of programming languages derived from Iverson’s mathematical notation Bob has good ideas we should consider. I've been updating the SIGAPL page with notices of these functional-language conferences to which he refers: please take a look and recommend any other venues that look promising. On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Robert Bernecky <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi, all, I am not convinced that this group is a good idea, for several reasons. Here are some of those reasons, as I see them, being somebody who has worked in the area of Functional Array Languages for a while: 0. Oh, please include SAC (Sven-Bodo Scholz, at Heriot-Watt U in Edinburgh) in the language list. SAC is beating everybody else in performance, as the attached papers show. Think of SAC as an extensible APL, even though it lacks some important features (no higher-order functions). 1. ACM SIGAPL existed outside of SIGPLAN, rather than as Just Another Language within the SIGPLAN umbrella. The effect of this, although perhaps intended to provide an incubator for a fledgling language, was to prevent the good ideas of APL from being exposed to the more larger programming language community. Action plan: Infect the extant SIGPLAN, IFL, ICFP, and other functional and programming communities with the ideas of APL, showing how it is better than what they are using now, and why. See the attached as an example (with a lousy summary) of this. 2. There is already a small group associated with ACM PLDI, promoting the ideas of functional array languages, and exchanging ideas among those interested in them. These are the PLDI Arrays Workshops. I am one a member of the Program Committee of this year's Workshop. As far as I know, no papers have been received for this workshop yet. It has not been well-advertised, as far as I can tell: http://conf.researchr.org/track/pldi-2016/ARRAY-2016 Laurie Hendren, David Padua, Stephen Herhut, and Clemens Grelck are also on the program committee. Action plan: Work within the extant programming languages community, rather than building yet another island of exiles. Action plan: Volunteer for the PLDI Arrays Workshops, and PLEASE submit papers to same, giving your concrete research results. Soon! 3. The ideas presented in the Arrays Workshops have been, by and large, quite primitive, and ignorant (sorry!) of the APL language. For example, one paper given at the Edinburgh conference recently touted their invention of something that we know as "scalar extension". Action plan: Get the fundamental ideas behind APL out to the larger programming community by concrete actions. These ideas include, but are not limited to: - functional notation (no side effects) - rectangular arrays (NOT vectors of vectors!!) as fundamental data objects, passed by value and and out of functions. - higher-order functions: adverbs and conjunctions. - typeless programming. Personally, I consider that being able to compile code to achieve better performance than traditional languages can do (See attached papers again) is crucial to acceptance, as is achieving excellent parallel performance with NO source code changes. We have achieved both of these goals with SAC, but much remains to be done. 4. There is much wasted effort in the functional array languages community, that could be avoided if we worked together, instead of reinventing the wheel. For example, in compiler projects alone, we have SAC, APEX, and at least two different Dyalog APL compilers. Action plan: Work within the functional array languages community to develop tool sets, such as compiler optimizations, that be used in a variety of settings. Like gcc, one key here is to define a common intermediate language that can be used to express the source languages for the relevant functional array languages. I have, in my back pocket, but in need of funding, an idea for a book that describes, the current state of array language optimizations, much as Bacon, et al's: Compiler Transformations for High-Performance Computing describes classical ones. The idea behind my "Optimizations for Functional Array Languages" (OFFAL) is that each chapter introduces a new optimization, of set of related optimizations, offering the motivation for each of them, with benchmarks and executable APL code that implements the optimization. The result should be, ignoring things that I don't care about, such as tokenization, syntax analysis, and run-time code generation, a usable optimizer for a generic, high-performance functional array language compiler. 5. APLers are extremely good at ignoring work done outside the APL community. This blinkered approach (some call it focused, but we know better...) does not do us any good. As a simple example, consider that NO APL dialect, with the sole exception of SAC allows users to create their own derived data types. Instead, new data types can only be created by the anointed high priests of implementation. This is a waste of everybody's time, and results in applications that are harder to write, harder to maintain, harder to communicate, and harder to compile effectively. [Gluing things together with "enclose" does NOT constitute a new data type; it's merely a kludge.] You have until April 1 to submit papers to Array'16. Bob On 16-03-09 07:35 PM, LaRocque, Guy (NRCan/RNCan) wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > > > You are receiving this email because you are a member of the steering > committee of an association or belong to the community of developers or > consultants of a programming language derived from Iverson’s > mathematical notation, including APL, J, K, A+, Nial or Gauss. Recently, > I had a discussion with APL colleagues about the international > visibility of these different array programming languages. We are aware > of the fact that the majority of associations, developers and > consultants have good web sites with a lot of good information, but our > impression is that there is a lack of good communications among the > different associations in different parts of the world. > > > > The reason I am sending you this email is to suggest the idea of forming > an informal international group that will improve communications among > the organizations and users of languages derived from Iverson’s > mathematical notation. This international group could (1) establish > linkages between the web sites of the different associations, developers > or consultants, (2) organize webinars, (3) assemble lists of users > across the world, and (4) provide efficient means of internet > communications among organizations and users. > > > > The objective of this idea is not to create a “super” organization that > will consider existing groups as affiliates, but simply to promote good > communications and improve the visibility and use of the different > languages. If you like the idea and wish to initiate discussions, > please, let me know. > > > > Kind Regards > > > > Guy Larocque > > > > ************************************************* > > Guy Larocque, Ph.D. > > Research scientist/Chercheur scientifique > > Natural Resources Canada/Ressources naturelles Canada > > Canadian Forest Service/Service canadien des forêts > > Laurentian Forestry Centre/Centre de foresterie des Laurentides > > 1055 du P.E.P.S. > > POB Box 10380, Stn. Ste-Foy > > Québec (QC), G1V 4C7 > > Canada > > Tel: 418-648-5791 > > Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > Editor of/ Éditeur deEcological Forest Management Handbook > <https://www.crcpress.com/Ecological-Forest-Management-Handbook/Larocque/9781482247855> > > > > > > > -- Robert Bernecky Snake Island Research Inc 18 Fifth Street Ward's Island Toronto, Ontario M5J 2B9 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> tel: +1 416 203 0854<tel:%2B1%20416%20203%200854> -- Devon McCormick, CFA Quantitative Consultant
