Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #28654
| From | "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: Forth reinvention |
| Date | 2014-02-21 12:38 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <le7hcn$2nm$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <b5ec955a-146f-41ea-a227-22e4224cab49@googlegroups.com> <o7KdncO2m9MJxJvOnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@supernews.com> <le5pq8$ie9$1@dont-email.me> <UpSdnZ24iMXIM5vOnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@supernews.com> |
on 21/02/2014 01:39:30, "Elizabeth D. Rather" wrote: > On 2/20/14 10:50 AM, Alex McDonald wrote: >> on 20/02/2014 19:37:55, "Elizabeth D. Rather" wrote: >>> On 2/19/14 11:19 PM, dambere@web.de wrote: >> >>> >>>> - Automatic parallelization: >>>> The trend goes to multi core architectures. A programming language that is relieving the programmer >> from the not inconsiderable task of paralleling programs will necessarily >> be attractive. > >>> Parallelization is an implementation strategy, not a language feature. >> >> Here I disagree, and very strongly indeed. Concurrent and parallel >> progamming demand languages that allow more than just task or process >> management. There are many forms; SIMD, parallel execution on tightly >> coupled, loosely coupled and decoupled systems, shared distributed >> memory, concurrent actor models, future and promise models -- heck, a >> huge slew of parallel & concurrent stuff where the language is the >> difference between being able to do something and not being able to >> express yourself at all. And no, it's not just libraries or >> implementation strategy. > > Do you have an example? Yes. There's no way in Forth-the-language to specify an atomic operation for X 1 +!. Interestingly, it doesn't need multi-core for it to be a potential source of errors. That code isn't even guaranteed to be atomic on a single processor if it uses pre-emptive interrupts and the interrupt routine writes to X. Without basic atomic operation support, we can't support locks or semaphores in Forth. > > There seem to be lots of multi-core architectures out there nowadays, > but I haven't heard of a "new language" in which everything has to be > re-written in order to run on them. If programs written in C, C++, > Java, or whatever are now suddenly running parallel, surely that's > because the underlying components have been structured to enable the > parallel architecture. Of course, the hardware got there first. Much of my career has been spent chasing the "good ideas" that hardware designers put in their offerings. But languages must eventually catch up, because doing stuff like an atomic increment is but one of the issues where language assistance is essential if the concepts are to be transportable across architectures. Not just OSes, but chipsets too. It's not just multi-core either; that happens to be one of many ways of parallel processing, the two major categories being task and data parallelism. As an example of data parallelism I mentioned SIMD. Many languages find it very hard to take advantage of instruction level parallelism. Microsoft's latest & greatest C++ compiler barely supports SSE2, and requires the use of extensive pragmas to help out the compiler. Moving the pragmas into the language will help. See a great Intel exposition of the issue here; http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1612.pdf Forth is a bit of a laggard in this respect. Much of the ANS specification is suitsble for single core processors with no SIMD and non-preemptive scheduling to support concurrent programming. Now, it may be that this was a suitable target yesterday, and remains a suitable target today for resource constrained low end systems. But even cheap chips are way beyond that now, and with Forths targeting desktop or server class machines, we need task and data parallelism constructs built into the language. > > Cheers, > Elizabeth >
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 01:19 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 05:07 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 14:56 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 16:16 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 23:25 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 20:42 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 12:41 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-02-20 11:18 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 02:36 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-02-20 17:35 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 11:34 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 09:53 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 12:23 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 14:00 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 14:23 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-22 02:21 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-02-22 12:02 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-21 04:38 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-02-20 12:35 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-20 13:38 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-20 03:59 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 15:11 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention m.a.m.hendrix@tue.nl - 2014-02-20 07:41 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Richard Owlett <rowlett@pcnetinc.com> - 2014-02-20 06:38 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention dambere@web.de - 2014-02-20 12:03 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2014-02-20 07:08 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 09:37 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-20 20:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 15:39 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-02-21 10:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Paul E Bennett <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2014-02-21 11:10 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 13:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-21 05:46 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 12:55 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-21 15:11 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 09:23 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 12:38 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-22 13:29 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-22 07:52 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-22 19:06 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-23 13:40 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-20 20:40 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2014-02-20 18:43 -1000
Re: Forth reinvention Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2014-02-21 13:16 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2014-02-21 10:49 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-21 14:50 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-21 16:28 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-02-22 12:54 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnohavenotit.cnm> - 2014-02-22 10:27 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2014-02-22 17:49 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-21 20:51 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-22 09:39 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 02:40 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 19:24 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 22:48 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-23 04:39 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-23 22:46 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 14:26 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2014-02-24 02:44 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Spam@ControlQ.com - 2014-03-03 12:43 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-03 10:06 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2014-02-24 03:59 -0600
Re: Forth reinvention mike73900@gmail.com - 2014-03-03 14:04 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-05 06:59 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2014-03-05 16:33 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-03-05 09:08 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention mhx@iae.nl - 2014-03-05 10:47 -0800
Re: Forth reinvention AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-03-07 07:30 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2014-03-07 07:55 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2014-03-07 09:29 +0000
Re: Forth reinvention AKK <akk@nospam.org> - 2014-03-07 12:04 +0100
Re: Forth reinvention "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email@xnothavet.cqm> - 2014-03-07 17:03 -0500
Re: Forth reinvention Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2014-03-08 05:31 -0800
csiph-web