Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: "J Thomas" <jethomas5@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 3 Apr 2007 12:16:27 -0700
On Apr 3, 1:08 pm, John Passaniti <n...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And like I've said before, the hardware of Intellasys? Who cares.
Their use of Forth? Big deal. The hardware and software are trivia
compared to the *real* problem, which is providing the programmers with
the tools and a model to effectively use the hardware. Programming the
SEAforth processor involves a whole bunch of skills that many
programmers haven't dealt with before.
Sure. Even more important, if you come up with a wonderful way to
provide that model, how do you get paid for it? if Intellasys gets a
few dozen customers who buy a few hundred million processors each,
then they do OK. But that isn't a big market for third-party tools,
and it isn't even a big market for Intellasys tools. Hard to avoid
skimping on that.
How will I break my computation up so it most efficiently maps to
multiple processes? How will I actually allocate those processes to
physical processors, given that only adjacent processors can communicate
with each other? What kind of communications are appropriate in such a
system? What kind of tools will be provided to help me debug systems
that may have 24 concurrent and asynchronous processors?
In the old version that had only one processer per chip, they were
hoping to get the sort of volume that would let them sell for a dollar
a chip. If they can get the cost down now, if the industry has
progressed to the point they can sell for a dollar or two a chip
today, then the issue isn't how to *most efficiently* map your
computation to multiple processors etc.
The problem is to get your work done. If you see a way to use the
extra 24 processors to improve your result, then go for it. If you see
a way to use a second processor, that's good too. You're under no
obligation whatsoever to optimise your use of 25 processors. Your
first obligation is to get a working product out the door, and if it
turns out to be easiest to do that using 4% of the computing power on
the chip, that's fine. Expand into using more processors as you see
how.
Everyone is getting excited over the dribbles of information from
Intellasys. I'll get excited when I see the tools, models, and training
that they offer to actually make their hardware live up to the promise.
Sure. It's particularly interesting because Chuck is doing it, and
he's done great things before. Pioneering things. "You can tell the
real pioneers by the arrows in their backs." Chuck doesn't have a
great track record for projects that turn commercially successful
right away.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: John Passaniti
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- References:
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: jcomeau_ictx
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: Alex McDonald
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: rickman
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: Alex McDonald
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: J Thomas
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: Paul E. Bennett
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- From: John Passaniti
- Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- Prev by Date: Re: Forth Frustrations
- Next by Date: Re: Forth Frustrations
- Previous by thread: Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- Next by thread: Re: Structured Programming using Forth
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|