Subject: [boost] SYCL (RE: [compute] review)
From: Gruenke,Matt (mgruenke_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-12-28 18:33:13
From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Kyle Lutz
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2014 14:42
To: boost_at_[hidden] List
Subject: Re: [boost] [compute] review
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Gruenke,Matt wrote:
> Others libraries/frameworks (such as SYCL, Bolt, C++AMP, OpenACC, etc.)
> are all dependent on either a special compiler or special compiler extensions.
According to Khronos, that's incorrect.
The provisional specification includes the following features:
* Specifications for creating C++ template libraries and compilers
using the C++11 standard
* Easy to use, production grade API - built on-top of OpenCL and SPIR(tm)
* Compatible with standard CPU C++ compilers across multiple platforms,
^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^^^
as well as enabling new SYCL device compilers to target OpenCL devices
* Asynchronous, low-level access to OpenCL features for high performance
and low-latency - while retaining ease of use
If it didn't depend on C++11, or Boost would drop the C++03 compatibility requirement for new libraries, I'd even recommend using their C++ abstractions instead of Boost.Compute's custom core.
This e-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressees named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in respect of any information contained in it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and immediately destroy this e-mail and its attachments.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk