Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #647124 > unrolled thread

Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 02:05 +0200
    Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Piotr Agamirov <ppp@togit.ru> - 2026-08-03 12:05 +0000
    Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:18 +0200
      But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:22 +0200
      Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-04 00:45 +0800
      Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Bayard Djabrailov <yjbob@aodorbv.ru> - 2026-08-03 17:28 +0000
      Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-08-07 08:17 +0200
        Norton Commander and Norton Antivirus again? [AI Laptop Memory] (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 14:13 +0200

#647124 — Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Was: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon)

Hi,

Now that the debate with Chris M. Thomasson
has culminated in questions of elasticity,
I suggest this homework:

- Game Engine in WebGPU
   It will support the life cycle of sprites,
   like sprites comming out of nowhere,
   and being destroyed by arms,
   just like in Space invader.

This would be surely a fantastic exercise,
to see what a GPU can do and cannot do,
in respect of life cycle of threads, especially

modern GPUs that sell the CUDA dream.

Have Fun!

Become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon.

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
> 
> A nosomatic AI chirurgeon is a halfling student
> of sickness, and a master of the ebb and flow of
> the energies of life and death of data packets.
> 
> He is a air bender, water bender and earth bender
> in one person, using OpenVINO to juggle with
> CPU, GPU and NPU.
> 
> Last but not least he can freely switch between
> symbolic and neural representation of knowledge
> forms, there is no abyss for him.
> 
> Bye
> 
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The nature of time has puzzled people -- from the ancient
>> Greeks to the present day -- Especially the nosomatic
>> perception of time is a hot topic now.
>>
>> How does time evolve inside a GPU with multiple units
>> or a CPU with multiple cores. GPUs even having multiple
>> logical threads inside a group.
>>
>> Forget the von Neumann model of computing. You need
>> a total new thinking of shared memory and more
>> message passing, and have a grip of vector and
>>
>> matrix tiling of problems. π-WAM already deploys
>> logic tiling in its Seven Eleven demonstrator. So forget
>> everything you have learned in your BASIC computer
>>
>> course for your Sputnik Commodore C64 with 8088.
>>
>> Bye
> 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#647127

Mild Shock wrote:

> Now that the debate with Chris M. Thomasson has culminated in questions
> of elasticity, I suggest this homework:
> 
> - Game Engine in WebGPU
>    It will support the life cycle of sprites,
>    like sprites comming out of nowhere,
>    and being destroyed by arms,
>    just like in Space invader.

Mandelbrot fractal, imaged on a complex plane

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#647128 — Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Hi,

 > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.

 > that has different
 > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
 > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),

Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
Which has then the advantage of:

Modern operating systems like Windows 11
enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
(or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
malicious programs from injecting and executing
code inside data-only memory regions.
https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:

Slide 58, Hack Computer
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view

But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
allows storage annotations read_write and

read. I use read_write for the data RAM
of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can

see that here, its open source:

@group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
@group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;

11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget

Hope this Helps!

Bye

Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
 > On 03/08/2026 6:28 PM, David Brown wrote:
 >> On 03/08/2026 11:41, Richard Harnden wrote:
 >>> On 03/08/2026 09:16, David Brown wrote:
 >>
 >>>> On most targets, function pointers are the same size as void* 
pointers. But there are exceptions, with some small microcontrollers and 
DSPs having different kinds of pointers with different sizes, depending 
on the memory space involved.  I have yet to see a situation where there 
was any reason for storing a function address in a "void*" rather than a 
more appropriate typedef, such as :
 >>>>
 >>>>      typedef void (*FVoid)(void);
 >>>
 >>> dlsym requires that pointer-to-function is compatible with a void*
 >>>
 >>
 >> As I say, I have yet to see a situation where using void* for 
function pointers was more appropriate than using a function pointer 
type.  If the OS system calls or standard OS libraries makes it a 
requirement that function pointers are converted to or from void* for 
some calls, then of course you need to follow those requirements - it's 
the people who designed the interfaces that made questionable design 
choices.
 >>
 >
 > Nope, you're wrong.  You're dead wrong.  The world isn't built on C,
 > even though here in comp.lang.c we like to pretend it is.
 >
 > Several language environments allow function generation on the fly,
 > these functions need to be garbage collected.  Common Lisp is an
 > example, therefore comp.lang.lisp is added to this discussion.
 >
 > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
 >
 > You will have to go out of your way to make a computer architecture
 > incompatible with garbage collected and heap allocated binary code,
 > something I've been told SBCL does internally [1] to create an archi-
 > tecture that has different
 >
 > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
 > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
 >
 > and when you do that, I'll just claim you're making a /malicious
 > computer architecture/ and refuse to use it.
 >
 >
 > [1] I've not looked at the code, but told the garbage collector can
 > and will at least move the code around, if not collect it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#647129 — But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

Well there are two viewpoint, the "client"
of the GPU, which is the CPU, and the "server"
of the GPU, which is the command processor

queue of the GPU device. So basically as
a CPU client I can write the memory area,
that is later mapped to my GPU code storage.

And this way have a compiler, even written
in Prolog, that compiles pi-WAM to my Hack VM,
that can then be then deployed to GPU.

You could also try the same with a Tiny
LISP VM. And a grown up LISP to act as
the compiler. Would be a similar exercise.

Have Fun!

Bye

Mild Shock schrieb:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/
> 
> I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
> pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:
> 
> Slide 58, Hack Computer
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view
> 
> But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
> Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
> allows storage annotations read_write and
> 
> read. I use read_write for the data RAM
> of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
> code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can
> 
> see that here, its open source:
> 
> @group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
> @group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;
> 
> 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
> https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget
> 
> Hope this Helps!
> 
> Bye
> 
> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
>  > On 03/08/2026 6:28 PM, David Brown wrote:
>  >> On 03/08/2026 11:41, Richard Harnden wrote:
>  >>> On 03/08/2026 09:16, David Brown wrote:
>  >>
>  >>>> On most targets, function pointers are the same size as void* 
> pointers. But there are exceptions, with some small microcontrollers and 
> DSPs having different kinds of pointers with different sizes, depending 
> on the memory space involved.  I have yet to see a situation where there 
> was any reason for storing a function address in a "void*" rather than a 
> more appropriate typedef, such as :
>  >>>>
>  >>>>      typedef void (*FVoid)(void);
>  >>>
>  >>> dlsym requires that pointer-to-function is compatible with a void*
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >> As I say, I have yet to see a situation where using void* for 
> function pointers was more appropriate than using a function pointer 
> type.  If the OS system calls or standard OS libraries makes it a 
> requirement that function pointers are converted to or from void* for 
> some calls, then of course you need to follow those requirements - it's 
> the people who designed the interfaces that made questionable design 
> choices.
>  >>
>  >
>  > Nope, you're wrong.  You're dead wrong.  The world isn't built on C,
>  > even though here in comp.lang.c we like to pretend it is.
>  >
>  > Several language environments allow function generation on the fly,
>  > these functions need to be garbage collected.  Common Lisp is an
>  > example, therefore comp.lang.lisp is added to this discussion.
>  >
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
>  >
>  > You will have to go out of your way to make a computer architecture
>  > incompatible with garbage collected and heap allocated binary code,
>  > something I've been told SBCL does internally [1] to create an archi-
>  > tecture that has different
>  >
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
>  >
>  > and when you do that, I'll just claim you're making a /malicious
>  > computer architecture/ and refuse to use it.
>  >
>  >
>  > [1] I've not looked at the code, but told the garbage collector can
>  > and will at least move the code around, if not collect it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#647130 — Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

On 04/08/2026 12:18 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

I'm not looking up the specific API, but Win32 has interfaces to ask
the operating system for heap allocation with and without execution
permissions.

               This means, whatever your intentions, the operating still
gives you a void * that you're then supposed to turn into void(*)(void)
on your own.

               I don't know why we're discussing this in sci.physics.rel-
ativity, nor sci.math, but I'll just go with the flow for now.

> 
> I adopted data RAM and code ROM model for
> pi-WAM from Hack, which has the same separation:
> 
> Slide 58, Hack Computer
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_fxYmmRNXTkAzmZ6YMoX9NXZIRVCKiw/view
> 
> But my motivation was not Johnny Depp prevention.
> Rather the caching of GPUs. Because WGSL
> allows storage annotations read_write and
> 
> read. I use read_write for the data RAM
> of my Hack VM variant, and read for the
> code ROM of my Hack VM variant. You can
> 
> see that here, its open source:
> 
> @group(0) @binding(0) var<storage, read> code: array<i32>;
> @group(0) @binding(1) var<storage, read_write> state: array<i32>;
> 
> 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
> https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget


Well, I only use my GPU for OpenGL 4.6, so I'll lot you do all the
work in CUDA.  Please enjoy!

-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#647131 — Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Mild Shock wrote:

>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different *  sizeof ( void * ), and *  sizeof ( void (*)(
>  > void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11

you are insignificant, you dont know what this world maanifold is all 
about. Kiss my ass. I shit on swtzerland, a fictitious country of inbreed 
gays.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#647169 — Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU)

Am Montag000003, 03.08.2026 um 18:18 schrieb Mild Shock:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
> 
>  > that has different
>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
> 
> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
> Which has then the advantage of:
> 
> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
> malicious programs from injecting and executing
> code inside data-only memory regions.
> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/

That's imho not that 'modern', because already in the eighties Unix 
systems had 'Execution prevention' (of data), simply by putting 
programms in one part of the memory and data into a different one.

Data could not be executed, because the flag 'executable' was not set 
for their memory.

It was actually a 'bug', that earlier versions of current systems 
allowed execution of data.

...

TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#647175 — Norton Commander and Norton Antivirus again? [AI Laptop Memory] (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

There is a relationship to recent AI Laptops
and how much memory they can access and/or
share with the GPU in accelerator mode.

A fine grained machanism did not exist for
budget laptops. Its a feature which a) needs
modern ( not older than ca. 20 years ) OS

and b) needs modern (not older than ca.
20 years) hardware.

Check for yourself:

NX bit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NX_bit

Executable-space protection
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executable-space_protection

So if you use an older PC not only use Norton
Commander, but better also Norton Antivirus. LoL
But the architecture of the OS and hardware

can be more complex, than to have a bit on the
physical memory page level. You might also organize
it via logical views, and combine it with

virtualization i.e. swapping to hard disks. Hard
and OS support varies as well there, how far
translation tables can manage such a bit effeciently.

See also:

3 GB barrier
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_GB_barrier

Physical Address Extension (PAE),
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

In as far the relationship to recent AI Laptops
is that for example Windows 10 32-bit editions
could only adress 4 GB. What surely helps are

64-bit editions. My Windows 11 AI Laptop has
32 GB total memory, and can share 16 GB with the
GPU. I didn't check yet how programming languages

such as JavaScript, Python and Java behave. Their
runtimes have usually an overlayed memory model.
And tagged pointers or compressed points can reduce

the available memory space. But LLM software when
used for local AI, usually tries to tap into
very large portions of memory, and recent trends

are virtualization of local LLMs:

Maximize throughput with PagedAttention. Advanced
scheduling and continuous batching ensure peak
GPU utilization.
https://vllm.ai/

Brain food on how to evolve pi-WAM and what
does the concept of GPUBuffer mean in WebGPU?
Mostlikely the logical model here is coprocessor

device bound memory, and the physical can
realize it via system memory sharing. But I wrote
about that already in my post:

But how can you deploy. when its ROM?

Bye

Thomas Heger schrieb:
> Am Montag000003, 03.08.2026 um 18:18 schrieb Mild Shock:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>  > I've also added comp.theory so Mild Shock can comment.
>>
>>  > that has different
>>  > *  sizeof ( void * ), and
>>  > *  sizeof ( void (*)( void ) ),
>>
>> Could indicate a data RAM and code ROM model.
>> Which has then the advantage of:
>>
>> Modern operating systems like Windows 11
>> enforce strict Data Execution Prevention (DEP)
>> (or NX/XD bit security features) to prevent
>> malicious programs from injecting and executing
>> code inside data-only memory regions.
>> https://root-nation.com/en/soft-en/lifehacks/en-dep-windows-all-about/
> 
> That's imho not that 'modern', because already in the eighties Unix 
> systems had 'Execution prevention' (of data), simply by putting 
> programms in one part of the memory and data into a different one.
> 
> Data could not be executed, because the flag 'executable' was not set 
> for their memory.
> 
> It was actually a 'bug', that earlier versions of current systems 
> allowed execution of data.
> 
> ...
> 
> TH

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web