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

Groups > sci.physics > #896565 > unrolled thread

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

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

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 (Re: Train yourself to become a nosomatic AI chirurgeon) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 02:06 +0200
    Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Re: Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:17 +0200
      But how can you deploy, when its ROM? (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:21 +0200
      New addition to π-WAM is π-WAM Assembly (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-09 19:46 +0200

#896565 — Homework: Game Engine in WebGPU (Re: 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
>>
>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Hyperspectral measurements for inter-calibration,
>>> reached a significant milestone this summer.
>>>
>>> The naval observatory only uses fidget spinners
>>> to measure time, so forget Colorado.
>>>
>>> Bye
>>>
>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>  >
>>>  > So, there's at least three accounts of what can define 
>>> "measurement of
>>>  > time", in the micro, meso, and macro.
>>>  >
>>>  > Then these days pretty much the world relies on "the naval 
>>> observatory
>>>  > in Colorado" if not so much "the clock tower in Greenwich", as with
>>>  > regards to ye olde UTC, CUT, "Zulu", and so on, time.
>>>  >
>>>  > About relativity theory and "measuring rods and clocks", then, it's
>>>  > similar that "metric and norm" for "length and distance" also has
>>>  > about the Planckian what are "iota-values" as it would be, or, "Pauli
>>>  > Plancks", or "Dirac's Pauli Plancks", of measuring space, vis-a-vis,
>>>  > measuring time.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > So, there are at least three accounts of what defines measuring time,
>>>  > and at least three accounts of what defines measuring space.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > Then, since relativity theory is defined by what does that,
>>>  > it has the various ways, to so fulfill doing that.
>>>  >
>>>  >
>>>  > Yeah, I know, most "professional physicists" only have one of those
>>>  > on their little note-card with which they passed graduate school.
>>>
>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Ross Finlayson schrieb:
>>>>  > Or shaves pennies.
>>>>
>>>>  >>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI
>>>>  >>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>  >>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>
>>>> Cost/hour: $200,000.00
>>>>
>>>> LoL
>>>>
>>>> Bye
>>>>
>>>> P.S.: If it could do some quant trading magic, one would
>>>> possibly pay so much. But Logtalk is simply too lame:
>>>>
>>>> Version release notes
>>>> XVM Engine v10.2.4 is the full engine capable of running
>>>> all XVM and Logtalk programs, excluding for logtalk tools.
>>>>
>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The 9122171.18175435 is a little offending, what if one
>>>>> keeps a federal secret after the 6 fraction digit?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bye
>>>>>
>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, leaving the beaten path of my Prolog system
>>>>>> probing, and look at some newer beast.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This looks bad:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>>> 9122171.18175435
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Expected result:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?- format('~6f', [pi**14]), nl.
>>>>>> 9122171.181754
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bye
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW: Tested using this test tester:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> X-Machines Virtual Machine (XVM™) is a neurosymbolic virtual AI 
>>>>>> processor which combines neural processes with symbolic reasoning.
>>>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/marketplace/pp/prodview-6luxq22pgmehe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mild Shock schrieb:
>>>>>>  >>> See also:
>>>>>>  >>> https://prolog-lang.org/ImprovementsForum/0110-format.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#896568 — 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]

#896569 — 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]

#896624 — New addition to π-WAM is π-WAM Assembly (Re: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...])

Hi,

 >>> How do you break out of a loop,

What Hamelt is to English language, is Hack to
Compiler Construction. The playbook of Hack contains
every drama that a Compiler Construction will face.
In the following we show how we realized Project 6:
Assembler from the Nand to Tetris journey via
a little Prolog DSL.

BTW, roughly or maybe not?
Hack (the book) =
Nand to Tetris (the website) =
Nisan, N. and Schocken, S. (the authors)

See also:

π-WAM Assembly: Comfortable Labels and Goto
https://medium.com/2989/1a11dd512813

Have Fun!

Bye


Mild Shock schrieb:
 > Hi,
 >
 > pi-WAM is compiled to Hack VM. You
 > can realize goto's wherever you want. The
 > Hack VM I am using is a variant of:
 >
 > The Elements of Computing Systems
 > Nisan, N. and Schocken, S. - June 15, 2021, MIT Press
 > https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262539807/the-elements-of-computing-systems/
 >
 > I just combine the 16-bit A and D instructions
 > into single 32-bit instructions. You
 > find a Hack VM interpreter for WebGPU here:
 >
 > 11.4 Giga Lips with a Budget Laptop
 > https://github.com/Jean-Luc-Picard-2021/gigabudget
 >
 > Hava Fun!
 >
 > Bye
 >
 > Mild Shock schrieb:
 >> Hi,
 >>
 >> Using Java sometimes doesn't make me a Java
 >> evangelist. I wouldn't care less about any
 >> programming language, because the idea of
 >>
 >> pi-WAM draws from pi-calculus and WAM. But
 >> since we are in 2026, not many people
 >> might remember pi-calculus:
 >>
 >> Functions as Processes
 >> Robin Milner - June 1989
 >> https://hal.science/docs/00/07/54/05/PDF/RR-1154.pdf
 >>
 >> AI chat bots know pi-calculus from time to
 >> time, while interacting, they spit out
 >> pi-calculus. I have always to tame them,
 >>
 >> and let them cool down, since well, the
 >> pi-calculus doesn't happen directly in the
 >> pi-WAM. Rather in the FFI, which has create
 >>
 >> operations on threads and queue, frankly my
 >> pi-WAM is an extremly crippled, has only
 >> a few primitives from pi-calculus.
 >>
 >> BYe
 >>
 >> Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson schrieb:
 >>> On 29/07/2026 11:25 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
 >>>> On 07/29/2026 08:11 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
 >>>
 >>>>
 >>>> Then, of course, the idea that it naturally employs or "saturates"
 >>>> the processor resources while doing work, in the low-level, yet
 >>>> also has a direct interpretation in higher-level languages, even
 >>>> "higher-level languages without GOTO", has also that it's faster
 >>>> in both machine-organized, compiled, and interpreted environments.
 >>>
 >>> Didn't you say in some other post you've done Java professionally?
 >>>
 >>> How do you break out of a loop, from within a switch () statement
 >>> in Java?  I gather that's simply impossible, because "goto" isn't
 >>> implemented, and the "break" statement doesn't see labels outside
 >>> the switch ()?
 >>>
 >>> Not sure how well that fits within comp.theory, as I haven't sub-
 >>> scribed yet, but perhaps Mild Shock is willing to comment on that
 >>> glaring deficiency in the Java programming language?
 >>>
 >>
 >

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web