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 that.

Thanks, I called it dcompute because naming things is right up there with cache invalidation. 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 runtime for.

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 they'd understand.

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 extremely important.

A descriptive title could be:

"D-GPU: native D code running on GPUs, FPGAs and DSPs"

Reply via email to