keldaris

7 ms·

1.
by keldaris 3mo ago
Isn't that switch basically a downgrade? You get some more single core performance and some weight savings, but also a worse (and smaller) screen, less multicore performance, less GPU performance, less video encoding performance and a
2.
by keldaris 3mo ago
Is that actually true? I've never looked into the API differences or how YouTube ads actually work, but I'm using a current Google Chrome version on MacOS, with uBlock Origin Lite and SponsorBlock, and I'm watching YouTube wi
3.
by keldaris 5mo ago
I actually haven't - I tried Gemini 3.0 Pro in Antigravity and was disappointed enough that I didn't pay much attention to the 3.1 release, it was notably worse than Opus and GPT at the time, and much more prone to "think&quo
4.
by keldaris 5mo ago
I've had reasonable success using GPT for both neighbor list and Barnes-Hut implementations (also quad/oct-trees more generally), both of which fit your description, haven't tried Ewald summation or PME / P3M. However, w
5.
by keldaris 5mo ago
As a scientist (computational physicist, so plenty of math, but also plenty of code, from Python PoCs to explicit SIMD and GPU code, mostly various subsets of C/C++), I can confirm - Codex is qualitatively better for my usecases than C
6.
by keldaris 6mo ago
Out of curiosity, how does the size and performance of the generated WASM compare to just compiling the same Raylib example from the equivalent C code via Emscripten? In other words, how much overhead does the choice to use Swift add here o
7.
by keldaris 10mo ago
It's not crazy, it's just what happens if you write mostly C with some conveniences where they actually make sense instead of "modern C++". I generally write very performance sensitive code, so it's naturally fairly
8.
by keldaris 10mo ago
Thankfully, you can still write C++ just fine without the "modern" stuff and have not only readable code, but also sane compile times. The notion, explicitly mentioned in the article, that all this insane verbosity also adds 5 sec
9.
by keldaris 11mo ago
Same here, I have multiple decades of experience running Linux on desktops and servers alike, and Omarchy just saves me time and manages to be productive and fun at the same time. Personally, I don't feel any moral obligation to invest
10.
by keldaris 1y ago
> and then released Vulkan years later as a response that has had incredibly slow adoption due to the same over complexity that OpenCL died from. I agree with everything else you said, but as someone who has used both OpenCL and Vulkan,
11.
by keldaris 1y ago
There's nothing wrong with using LTO, but I prefer simply compiling everything as a single translation unit ("unity builds"), which gets you all of the LTO benefits for free (in the sense that you still get fast compile times
12.
by keldaris 1y ago
Generally, the reason to bother with this approach is if you have a project that only needs tensor cores in a tiny part of the code and otherwise benefits from the cross platform nature of OpenCL, so you have a mostly shared codebase with a
13.
by keldaris 1y ago
WebGPU has no support for tensor cores (or their Apple Silicon equivalents). Vulkan has an Nvidia extension for it, is there any way to make MoltenVK use simdgroup_matrix instructions in compute shaders?
14.
by keldaris 1y ago
Technically, OpenCL can also include inline PTX assembly in kernels (unlike any compute shader API I've ever seen), which is relevant for targeting things like tensor cores. You're absolutely right about the language limitation, t
15.
by keldaris 1y ago
How are you writing compute shaders that work on all platforms, including Mac? Are you just writing Vulkan and relying on MoltenVK? AFAIK, the only solution that actually works on all major platforms without additional compatibility layers
16.
by keldaris 2y ago
In practice, you're going to test the next version of the compiler anyway if you want to be sure your code actually works. Agreements or not, compilers have bugs on a regular basis. From the point of view of a programmer, it doesn&#x27
17.
by keldaris 2y ago
Luckily, little of it matters if you simply write C for your actual target platforms, whatever they may be. C thankfully discourages the very notion of "general purpose" code, so unless you're writing a compiler, I've ne
18.
by keldaris 2y ago
> I’m convinced there’s a contingent of devs who don’t like/grok abstraction. I am one of those. I grok abstractions just fine (have commercially written idiomatically obtuse Scala and C#, some Haskell for fun, etc.), but I don&#x27
19.
by keldaris 2y ago
If that's true, how are they so much more reasonable in most developed countries with far greater government involvement still? Is the US government just uniquely bad at healthcare somehow? Why?
20.
by keldaris 2y ago
This looks like a nice case study for when you're already using Rust for other reasons and just want to make a bit of numerical code go fast. However, as someone mostly writing C++ and Julia, this does not look promising at all - it&#x
21.
by keldaris 2y ago
It depends on what you're doing. For writing FP32 number crunching code from scratch (meaning you don't care about something like Torch, or even cuBLAS/cuDNN), I haven't encountered cases where I couldn't match CUDA
22.
by keldaris 2y ago
While this is completely true, it is also true that OpenCL 1.2 is the one compute API that just works on every major platform and the drivers don't seem that unusably bad (though I'm not claiming experience of every platform here,
23.
by keldaris 3y ago
Is there a way to directly use these developments to already write a reasonable subset of C/C++ for simpler usecases (basically doing some compute and showing the results on screen by just manipulating pixels in a buffer like you would
24.
by keldaris 3y ago
Completely agree with all of that, but I would add that even if you never have to write any assembly at all, just the ability to read your own code in disassembled form is a superpower. It's not hard to learn the basics and, in additio
25.
by keldaris 3y ago
I don't own a Tesla, but if I refused to buy any product with misleading marketing, I'm not sure I'd ever buy anything more sophisticated than a loaf of bread. Then again, I also don't use any driver assist features beyo
26.
by keldaris 3y ago
Certainly not arguing that it's fair or just, but it's important to distinguish the mechanisms to have any hope of potentially improving the situation.
27.
by keldaris 3y ago
How much of that effect could be explained by the ability to afford better legal representation rather than direct preferential treatment?
28.
by keldaris 4y ago
Can you elaborate on your experience? There's a lot of negative D opinions from people who've barely used it and, for obvious self-selection reasons, a lot of positive ones from long term true believers. It would be interesting to
29.
by keldaris 5y ago
Then they can just say so and spin it as a PR win - "look how security conscious we are these days". Very publicly removing a formerly-headline feature with no explanation and then even failing at that is just mind boggling.
30.
by keldaris 5y ago
That's what people generally expected when the whole P-core vs E-core on different microarchitectures design was announced. Instead of going for this, Intel went out of their way to state that there would be no AVX-512 even on P-cores

More ›