checker659

Said GPUs spend half the time just waiting for memory.

I can't tell if this is satire or serious.

See that's the problem. Unless this is government mandated, no sane vendor is going to pay for the performance penalty.

> Doing the same thing in software on a contemporary commercially established CPU is going to be much, much faster.

In what sense? Do you know if there's been proper research done in this area? Surely implementing the bounds checking / permissions would be faster in hardware.

CHERI, but that's just one example.

I never understood why software has to pay for the lack of memory safety primitives in the hardware.

A language runtime vibe-coded for a language that people will very likely vibe code in. Something about that makes my head hurt a little.

I guess, it's easier for LLMs to generate dynamic language code than something like Rust (or even assembly). But still, one does wonder, why not just compile down to C or ASM. But I guess the answer is the ease of debugging / maintainability.

Have you tried talking to someone at places like ESRI?

It means you don't have internal limiting beliefs that misleads one to believe they cannot grow out of their currently (personally disagreeable) situation / reality.

The amusing part is the implication that communication skills can't be learned, even by someone who's worked alone their whole career, if it came to that (*especially* by someone of Fabrice Bellard's calibre). Gatekeeping much?

They are absolutely good at reviewing C code. To catch stupid bugs and such. Great for pair programming type use.

Absolutely. I just wanted to point out the fact that doing so is a symptom of lazy thinking. On one hand, it might be hurtful to the Chinese people. On the other hand, complacency and denial can be harmful. It's easy to brush off your competitors only to find yourself in a tortoise/hare type situation.

Just because something is beneficial does not mean it will be taken up by the community. My question is (and that is what I'm most interested in atm) what makes Rust's adoption inevitable? Are there people paying to make that happen? Are kernel level security bugs that big of a concern now that migrating to Rust is a pressing issue? Do you see what I mean?

(Again, just to clarify my comment: I'm not challenging anyone. It's just that there are hundreds of programming languages out there. Rust's been around for a good while. So, why now? And circling back to my original question, what makes its adoption inevitable?)

Two words: growth mindset.

I’m not Chinese but I think people need a crutch to help them cope. Easy explanations are clutch.

What makes it inevitable?

I said "was", not "is". Also, I know how that's working out. Working with Vivado makes me want to barf.

FPGAs are more like CGRAs these days. With the right DSP units, it could absolutely be competitive with custom silicon.

> software developers generally aren't very good at doing things in parallel

If only hardware people would stop stereotyping. Also, do you guys not use use formal tools (BMC etc) now? Who do you think wrote those tools? Heck all the EDA stuff was designed by software people.

I just can't with the gatekeeping.

(Btw, this frustration isn't just pointed at you. I find this sentiment being parroted allover /r/FPGA on reddit and elsewhere. It's damn frustrating to say the least. Also, the worst thing is all the hardware folks only know C so they think all programming is imperative. VDHL is Ada for crying out loud.)

Are you using claude GUI or is this claude code? Is the interaction happening purely over the TUI interface or is claude also looking at code you've written so far (assuming you're in a socratic style dialogue).

Do you know if there are any tutorials that use bounded model checking tools from the very get go? For verilog or VHDL.

Apple already ships an MLX5 driver for ConnectX NICs.

Cost is also such a big issue.

There is nothing magical about CUDA

For a company that has repeatedly ignored macOS, your wishlist seems anything but a pipe dream. QSFP on a mac. Yeah right. If anything, they’ll double down on TB or some nonstandard interconnect.

What is a computer?

(Although, I do hope with the new work on supporting RDMA, the MLX5 driver shipped with macOS will finally support RDMA for ConnectX NICs)

https://kittenlabs.de/blog/2024/05/17/25gbit/s-on-macos-ios/

Now, only if IEEE would follow suit.

Isn't SR-IOV a thing with these big GPUs? Or, is it that you're not concerned with fractional granularity?

Are there any FPGA boards under 1000 dollars that support CXL?

Bang on. The self proclaimed detectives have never had to take TOEFL where you'll get marks deducted for not using connectors like furthermore.

Electron is no match for a O(n^3) algorithm.

Pass init=/bin/sh or what have you in GRUB cmdline