On 5/29/2017 3:52 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
How about calling it D-GPU ? I bet you'd get a lot more clicks on a name like
Thanks, I called it dcompute because naming things is right up there with cache
Calling it D-GPU would be misleading because there should be no reason you can't
use the generated SPIRV on DSPs, FPGAs and whatever else there is an OpenCL
From https://github.com/libmir/dcompute :
"This project is a set of libraries designed to work with a modified ldc to
enable native execution of D on GPUs (and other more exotic target of OpenCL,
hereafter just 'GPUs')."
The clicks should be rectifiable with a good title and description.
Many years ago, D immutable types were called 'invariant'. People always asked
what invariant meant, and we'd reply "invariant types are immutable" and then
After going through that for the thousandth time, we renamed 'invariant' to
'immutable', and the questions ceased.
The trouble is, all I usually see is simply "DCompute". I have to click on a
link or do some searching to see what it is for. There's nothing to suggest that
it's for me if I'm interested in using D for FPGA programming. Google isn't
going to index it under "FPGA".
I'm sorry about being pushy about this, but I really want DCompute to succeed,
and the current name will impair this. Having the right name and branding is
A descriptive title could be:
"D-GPU: native D code running on GPUs, FPGAs and DSPs"