nbingham

17 ms·

1.
by nbingham 2y ago
I'm working on a compiler for asynchronous circuits. Once I have modules, placement, and routing working, I'll have an MVP. Hopefully, this will allow people without any computer engineering expertise to make chips. For now it has
2.
by nbingham 2y ago
I tested two C++ implementations of Calendar Queues again the standard library priority_queue. The first implementation uses a deque as a backing container and then fills the calendar with linked lists. The second implementation just uses v
3.
by nbingham 2y ago
I worked on a similar project - the Stanford braindrop chip. It's a really interesting technology, what happened is that most people don't really know how to train those systems. There's a group called Vivum that seems to hav
4.
by nbingham 2y ago
The reason we ended up with digital logic is because of noise. Hysteresis from digital gates was the only way to make such large systems from such small devices without all of our signaling turning into a garbled mess. Analog processing has
5.
by nbingham 3y ago
Rajit has since moved to Yale and has made quite a bit of progress on the tooling problems https://github.com/asyncvlsi/actflow https://avlsi.csl.yale.edu/act/doku.php https://avlsi.csl
6.
by nbingham 4y ago
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/963
7.
Show HN: Hsesim – handshaking expansions simulator for QDI circuits(github.com)
1 points by nbingham 7y ago|0 comments
8.
by nbingham 7y ago
I think there's been a misunderstanding. You're right, and I don't intend to condemn all of async, or even QDI for that matter :) I am doing my PhD on it, so I do think there is promise. I just think that arithmetic is better
9.
by nbingham 7y ago
Ideally, none. We're leaning toward FPGAs and CGRAs to accelerate tight inner loops. This means that it will have a huge effect on compilers. They will have to compile from a control flow behavioral description like C to a data-flow de
10.
by nbingham 7y ago
I was specifically talking about dual rail domino QDI. When you compare the typical dual rail domino QDI adder found in Andrew Lines thesis against a typical clocked carry lookahead adder like Kogge & Stone, it is worse by factors of be
11.
by nbingham 7y ago
Hence my thesis :)
12.
by nbingham 7y ago
Synchronous design tools are very good at making all of the pipeline stages have about the same logic depth, which is generally 6-8 transitions/cycle but can be much less. The fastest possible QDI circuit is a very simple, very small W
13.
by nbingham 7y ago
Yep, I saw that go by, and a lot of my work is heavily influenced by Andrew Lines. But what I've been seeing is that QDI is really bad at arithmetic because the acknowledgement requirements turn XORs into a nightmare hairball of sign
14.
by nbingham 7y ago
> This article is 17 years old and I haven't seen any clockless designs in my professional experience in all of that time. Yeah, async design takes a while, and async chips don't tend to be well advertised, but they are there.
15.
by nbingham 7y ago
And the truth is that we are. Here is a bunch of data on Intel's processes that I've pulled together from various public domain sources. The yield curves are a very rough estimate, so take them with a grain of salt. https:/&
16.
by nbingham 7y ago
Heyo, I'm a PhD student in the field. I figured I can talk about its current status. First, here are various search terms: clockless, self-timed, delay-insensitive, latency-insensitive, quasi delay-insensitive (QDI), speed independent,
17.
by nbingham 9y ago
Here is the counter argument to Stochastic Computing. http://csl.yale.edu/~rajit/ps/stochastic.pdf Basically, stochastic computing takes exponentially more time and energy to perform the same computation at the sa
18.
by nbingham 9y ago
Range-v3 seems to be solving a different problem. It seems to be introducing support for Pythonesque features like type-checking and list-comprehension. However, the algorithms that are documented still use first/last iterators ( http:
19.
by nbingham 9y ago
Inheritance as implemented by Go provides for a different school of thought from C++. In C++, you define the taxonomy, then define the objects in relation to that taxonomy. In Go its the opposite, defining taxonomy in relation to the object
20.
Show HN: Stdcore, a toy container library(nedbingham.com)
54 points by nbingham 9y ago|8 comments