Subject: Re: [boost] Accelerating algorithms with SIMD - Segmented iterators and alternatives
From: Simonson, Lucanus J (lucanus.j.simonson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-12 15:17:01
Manjunath Kudlur wrote:
>> I've been talking about the ct/rapidmind stuff, though my discussion
>> has been about the general idea and not the specifics of what they
>> may have implemented. I don't know exactly what is in there and
>> haven't tried it yet myself.
> I am sure both JIT approach and static metaprogramming approach have
> their places. My issue with ct/rapidmind/ArBB is the "unnatural-ness"
> it introduces to the programmer. Seems like the programmer has to be
> aware of "retained" mode vs. immediate mode when coding his
> algorithms. For some of the problems, I believe static metaprogramming
> (a la NT2) can be more natural to a C++ programmer.
>> If the dynamically generated code makes use of new hardware features
>> not available at the time the original code was compiled....
> Can't beat JIT in the above scenario. But the above scenario is
> arguably fictitious. HPC people will definitely recompile their code
> on newer platforms.
Manycore with SSE is going mainstream. Desktop applications of the near future will look more and more like HPC applications of today. Desktop users will not recompile their code.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk