Re: Research Positions
On 31/05/2017 7:24 PM, Chris wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 18:20:57 UTC, Chris wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 15:15:00 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: On 31/05/2017 2:10 PM, Chris wrote: [...] As long as the positions can be done in D (and the desire is there by those involved) then it does belong here. Given Chris being a regular that can be assumed :) I was personally very interested in it, except for the part where I'd have to move half way across the globe ;) Given that I finish up my honors this month. Your application would be more than welcome. Just give it a shot, you never know where life takes you. ;) PS @Rikki: aren't you connected to John Kane on LinkedIn? He did his PhD in our lab. I am not. But I will think about it, thanks.
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Thursday, 1 June 2017 at 01:45:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: You're right. Congratulations Nicholas for this great work and I wish it succeeds by any name he chooses for it. -- Andrei And nothing increases chances of success like contributions! (subtle hint)
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Thursday, 1 June 2017 at 01:42:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 5/31/17 7:28 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 22:15:33 UTC, Wulfklaue wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:28:47 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Perhaps there will be scope for renaming if/when this also includes graphics when either OpenCL is merged into the Vulkan API or Petar Kirov gets Vulkan SPIRV generation going on LLVM, but for now the name stays. People who GPU program are indeed a small group. But you do NOT entice other people to try it, when they do not even know a language has this feature set. And this comes down to marketing. Lets post "D has DCompute" or "D has D-GPU"... on Reddit, ycombinator and other forum or news site. What do you think people will more likely click on? So you don't post either of those titles and instead post "D has DCompute: Native heterogeneous computing on GPUs and more, hassle free!" "D has the invariant qualifier: It means immutable". While that statement holds and is the whole story, D has DCompute: It means you can program GPUs with it is not the whole story and is misleading in a marketing sense, but one that undersells dcompute, not oversells it. whereas D has DCompute: Native heterogeneous computing on GPUs and more, hassle free! does tell the whole story and sells dcompute as it is.
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 22:03:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Yes, the name matters, but this thread has been pretty thoroughly derailed from its original purpose. - Jonathan M Davis https://www.xkcd.com/386/
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On 5/31/17 6:03 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 18:55:14 bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:28:47 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: But can we please reduce the bike shedding Marketing is only bike shedding if you don't care how many people make use of your work. That may be true, but given how this was supposed to be a thread on some great news about this cool library, having most of the posts be about the name has got to be frustrating. Yes, the name matters, but this thread has been pretty thoroughly derailed from its original purpose. - Jonathan M Davis You're right. Congratulations Nicholas for this great work and I wish it succeeds by any name he chooses for it. -- Andrei
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On 5/31/17 7:28 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 22:15:33 UTC, Wulfklaue wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:28:47 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Perhaps there will be scope for renaming if/when this also includes graphics when either OpenCL is merged into the Vulkan API or Petar Kirov gets Vulkan SPIRV generation going on LLVM, but for now the name stays. People who GPU program are indeed a small group. But you do NOT entice other people to try it, when they do not even know a language has this feature set. And this comes down to marketing. Lets post "D has DCompute" or "D has D-GPU"... on Reddit, ycombinator and other forum or news site. What do you think people will more likely click on? So you don't post either of those titles and instead post "D has DCompute: Native heterogeneous computing on GPUs and more, hassle free!" "D has the invariant qualifier: It means immutable".
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 22:15:33 UTC, Wulfklaue wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:28:47 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Perhaps there will be scope for renaming if/when this also includes graphics when either OpenCL is merged into the Vulkan API or Petar Kirov gets Vulkan SPIRV generation going on LLVM, but for now the name stays. People who GPU program are indeed a small group. But you do NOT entice other people to try it, when they do not even know a language has this feature set. And this comes down to marketing. Lets post "D has DCompute" or "D has D-GPU"... on Reddit, ycombinator and other forum or news site. What do you think people will more likely click on? So you don't post either of those titles and instead post "D has DCompute: Native heterogeneous computing on GPUs and more, hassle free!" And so what if people start a big discussion about the name. If only 10% of those people come to the D site from a either language, its a instant success. Positive or negative marketing is a win-win in this case. For this discussion it is not the case, I haven't seen any new names. So (everybody) please discontinue derailing this thread. My advice to Walter is to hire a actual marketing person that can help focus resources and ideas. Perhaps that is a good idea, but it is not for me to decide. For my part in marketing I plan to give a talk/workshop at IWOCL just after DConf next may.
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:28:47 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Perhaps there will be scope for renaming if/when this also includes graphics when either OpenCL is merged into the Vulkan API or Petar Kirov gets Vulkan SPIRV generation going on LLVM, but for now the name stays. People who GPU program are indeed a small group. But you do NOT entice other people to try it, when they do not even know a language has this feature set. And this comes down to marketing. Lets post "D has DCompute" or "D has D-GPU"... on Reddit, ycombinator and other forum or news site. What do you think people will more likely click on? The people who are used to Compute, will still click on the GPU link. The people who are unfamiliar with Compute will still click on the GPU link, because its such a familiar term to them. And so what if people start a big discussion about the name. If only 10% of those people come to the D site from a either language, its a instant success. Positive or negative marketing is a win-win in this case. And GPU does not mean directly DirectX, OpenGL in people there minds. GPU people think about there graphical card because that is exactly what the term means. I have no dog in this discussion but as somebody just learning D it seems like a total wasted opportunity. Reading past topics D on those sites, it seems D has been fighting the whole GC stigma for years. D its GC marketing is bad. While other languages ( some even with GC like Go ) simply sail past, thanks to people pushing its virtues, when in reality D its GC actually performs better in specific tests. Marketing... From my view D has been mostly sitting on its behind for years, hoping for word-to-mouth to do the trick. While other languages used there big parents name as a cheap talking point memo ( Apple, Google, Mozilla ... ). And this is exactly why D has such difficulty being accepted outside its own community. People being too stubborn to recognize a marketing opportunity. My apologies for that comment but its true. D does not have the big name recognition and has a even "old" stigma these days. My advice to Walter is to hire a actual marketing person that can help focus resources and ideas. Hell, even a name change, a new look, ... who knows.
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 12:28:47 UTC, Nicholas Wilson wrote: I am more inclined to be persuaded by the fact that everybody that has actually done GPU programming has said that it makes sense to them. It would be a mistake to judge that on the basis of those posting in this forum. I've done some GPU work, but "compute" doesn't mean anything to me. The R task view for HPC lists a bunch of GPU packages, none of which use "compute" in the name: https://cran.r-project.org/web/views/HighPerformanceComputing.html I've also used PyCUDA and PyOpenCL, and am aware of PyMagma, none of which refer to "compute". But can we please reduce the bike shedding Marketing is only bike shedding if you don't care how many people make use of your work.
Re: Research Positions
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 18:20:57 UTC, Chris wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 15:15:00 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: On 31/05/2017 2:10 PM, Chris wrote: [...] As long as the positions can be done in D (and the desire is there by those involved) then it does belong here. Given Chris being a regular that can be assumed :) I was personally very interested in it, except for the part where I'd have to move half way across the globe ;) Given that I finish up my honors this month. Your application would be more than welcome. Just give it a shot, you never know where life takes you. ;) PS @Rikki: aren't you connected to John Kane on LinkedIn? He did his PhD in our lab.
Re: Research Positions
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 15:15:00 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: On 31/05/2017 2:10 PM, Chris wrote: On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 11:26:43 UTC, Joakim wrote: [...] In case anyone with a D background is interested in one of the positions. We use D for speech synthesis and it'd be great if we could use D for speech recognition too. However, it's not a key requirement. But I thought I'd put it out here, because this is a D forum, if I'm not completely mistaken ;) As long as the positions can be done in D (and the desire is there by those involved) then it does belong here. Given Chris being a regular that can be assumed :) I was personally very interested in it, except for the part where I'd have to move half way across the globe ;) Given that I finish up my honors this month. Your application would be more than welcome. Just give it a shot, you never know where life takes you. ;)
Project Highlight: excel-d
If you regularly follow the forums or saw Atila's lightning talk from DConf, you already will have heard about excel-d. Atila agreed to work with me on a Project Highlight a while back, but asked to wait until after DConf since he intended to talk about it there. So this post serves as a supplement to his talk and a brief introduction for those who haven't yet heard of it. The blog: https://dlang.org/blog/2017/05/31/project-highlight-excel-d/ Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/6eepgc/project_highlight_exceld_write_excel_plugins_in_d/
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/30/2017 5:12 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Ah, isn't English wonderful. I guess Walter is suffering the inverse of the Calvin & Hobbes "Verbing nouns weirds the language", nouning verbs does weird the language, but only to those who aren't used to that particular nouning of the verb. Just to clarify, I find that "Compute" is not evocative of "GPU". I read "CUDA by Example" a couple years ago, and even downloaded the CUDA SDK and compiled/ran a simple program on a graphics card. But I never noticed that "Compute" had anything specific to do with GPU programming. I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me: N: DCompute W: What's DCompute? N: Enables GPU programming with D W: Cool! instead of: N: D-GPU W: Cool! I can use D to program GPUs! The problem with the first conversation is W may just move on to the next topic rather than investigate what DCompute is. OK, I get that a portion of the community seems to think that dcompute is either too generic, is too easily passed over by the fact that it doesn't mention GPUs or otherwise could be named better. I am more inclined to be persuaded by the fact that everybody that has actually done GPU programming has said that it makes sense to them. But can we please reduce the bike shedding, that was not the point of this announcement, which was to bring together people interested in contributing to either the runtime libraries, LDC or LLVM and become familiar with goals, expected route of development and infrastructure. Perhaps there will be scope for renaming if/when this also includes graphics when either OpenCL is merged into the Vulkan API or Petar Kirov gets Vulkan SPIRV generation going on LLVM, but for now the name stays. Nic
Re: Faster Command Line Tools in D
On 5/31/17 1:09 AM, Patrick Schluter wrote: In any case, you can download the dataset from [1] if you like. There are several 100 Mb big zip files containing a collection of tmx files (translation memory exchange) with European Legislation. The files contain multi-alignment texts in up to 24 languages. The files are encoded in UCS-2 little-endian. I know for a fact (because I compiled the data) that they don't contain characters outside of the BMP. The data is public and can be used freely (as in beer). When I get some time, I will try to port the java app that is distributed with it to D (partially done yet). [1]: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/language-technologies/dgt-translation-memory Thanks, I'll bookmark it for later use. -Steve
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On 5/30/17 3:23 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote: On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me: N: DCompute W: What's DCompute? N: Enables GPU programming with D W: Cool! instead of: N: D-GPU W: Cool! I can use D to program GPUs! This was literally what happened to me when I saw the headline. I'm in the same camp, and I have a passing familiarity with the domain. Worse, only one day after the talk I'd already forgotten and thought DCompute does what DHDL does. It seems there are two paths - either choose an unrelated name and push it as a brand (e.g. Amazon, Google, and in our community Phobos or Vibe), or choose a name that immediately establishes the library as "the D approach to GPGPUs". The name "DCompute" is in an unfortunate corner of the branding space. Andrei
Re: Research Positions
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 11:03:23 UTC, Chris wrote: We are offering two research positions at the moment. Please follow the links for more information. 1. Research Fellow in Speech Recognition: https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/313953286/ 2. Research Student in the area of Voice Modelling and Speech Processing: https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/313951716/ Closing Date and Time: 12 Noon on 12th June 2017. What do these postings have to do with D? You might want to make that clear.
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 at 09:07:16 UTC, ParticlePeter wrote: On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: [...] D-GPU is very misleading to people who use the GPU for its original purpose, which is graphics programming. One could assume D-GPU being an alternative to Vulkan, OpenGL, DirectX. The term 'compute' is well established with the community of people using the gpu for, well, compute purpose. You need to ask your self if you want to attract people who understand that term and are willing to use or try it with D, or if you want to inform a broader spectrum of people that 'D' can now do some (whatever) stuff on the 'GPU'. So +1 for DCompute, but if you insist you should definitely narrow it down to D-GPGPU. D-GPGPU is explicit.
Research Positions
We are offering two research positions at the moment. Please follow the links for more information. 1. Research Fellow in Speech Recognition: https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/313953286/ 2. Research Student in the area of Voice Modelling and Speech Processing: https://www.linkedin.com/jobs/view/313951716/ Closing Date and Time: 12 Noon on 12th June 2017.
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 09:07:16 ParticlePeter via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: > On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: > > On 5/30/2017 5:12 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote: > >> Ah, isn't English wonderful. I guess Walter is suffering the > >> inverse of the Calvin & Hobbes "Verbing nouns weirds the > >> language", nouning verbs does weird the language, but only to > >> those who aren't used to that particular nouning of the verb. > > > > Just to clarify, I find that "Compute" is not evocative of > > "GPU". I read "CUDA by Example" a couple years ago, and even > > downloaded the CUDA SDK and compiled/ran a simple program on a > > graphics card. But I never noticed that "Compute" had anything > > specific to do with GPU programming. > > > > I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me: > > N: DCompute > > W: What's DCompute? > > N: Enables GPU programming with D > > W: Cool! > > > > instead of: > > N: D-GPU > > W: Cool! I can use D to program GPUs! > > > > The problem with the first conversation is W may just move on > > to the next topic rather than investigate what DCompute is. > > D-GPU is very misleading to people who use the GPU for its > original purpose, which is graphics programming. One could assume > D-GPU being an alternative to Vulkan, OpenGL, DirectX. > > The term 'compute' is well established with the community of > people using the gpu for, well, compute purpose. You need to ask > your self if you want to attract people who understand that term > and are willing to use or try it with D, or if you want to inform > a broader spectrum of people that 'D' can now do some (whatever) > stuff on the 'GPU'. > > So +1 for DCompute, but if you insist you should definitely > narrow it down to D-GPGPU. Something like d-compute-gpu or d-gpu-compute maybe? I don't know. Maybe dcompute is fine, but it's clear that for a number of folks, it's a pretty meaningless name. On the other hand, I don't know how many of such folks would even be interestend in using it. - Jonathan M Davis
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 19:23:42 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote: On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me: N: DCompute W: What's DCompute? N: Enables GPU programming with D W: Cool! instead of: N: D-GPU W: Cool! I can use D to program GPUs! This was literally what happened to me when I saw the headline. Same here ... DCompute may be a established term in that specific community but most other people do not pay attention to it. Yet, its a massive feature for any programming language, that is frankly being obscured by its naming. While D-GPU may not be the most accurate term, as people may assume its about graphical programming, marketing and accuracy are not exactly the same. But that can be solved with later having D-DirectX, D-OpenGL...
Re: DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC
On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 5/30/2017 5:12 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote: Ah, isn't English wonderful. I guess Walter is suffering the inverse of the Calvin & Hobbes "Verbing nouns weirds the language", nouning verbs does weird the language, but only to those who aren't used to that particular nouning of the verb. Just to clarify, I find that "Compute" is not evocative of "GPU". I read "CUDA by Example" a couple years ago, and even downloaded the CUDA SDK and compiled/ran a simple program on a graphics card. But I never noticed that "Compute" had anything specific to do with GPU programming. I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me: N: DCompute W: What's DCompute? N: Enables GPU programming with D W: Cool! instead of: N: D-GPU W: Cool! I can use D to program GPUs! The problem with the first conversation is W may just move on to the next topic rather than investigate what DCompute is. D-GPU is very misleading to people who use the GPU for its original purpose, which is graphics programming. One could assume D-GPU being an alternative to Vulkan, OpenGL, DirectX. The term 'compute' is well established with the community of people using the gpu for, well, compute purpose. You need to ask your self if you want to attract people who understand that term and are willing to use or try it with D, or if you want to inform a broader spectrum of people that 'D' can now do some (whatever) stuff on the 'GPU'. So +1 for DCompute, but if you insist you should definitely narrow it down to D-GPGPU.
