5 ms·
I doubt there would be a hard requirement on any AVX instructions, just that it can take advantage of them if available.
by dantiberian 7y ago
I doubt there would be a hard requirement on any AVX instructions, just that it can take advantage of them if available.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- plorkyeran 7y agoA hard requirement on AVX instructions is exactly the sort of thing I would expect out of Arthur Whitney. His software tends to be very opinionated, and that's one of the things that lets him do so much in so little code.
- tluyben2 7y agoThe version I downloaded from the site does (did?) depend on AVX instructions and would die on startup. There are other ('nightly builds') that fix this. One of the goals of the current team seems to be portability.
- scottlocklin 7y agoFWIIW J is moving in this direction as well; the last release version of it (807) needed a special build for older intel hardware (they subsequently made separate binaries for older hardware). AVX has been around since 2011/2012, so it doesn't seem like that big a deal. Admittedly I myself have older hardware kicking around I see no real reason to upgrade, but AVX is such a big win on array processing you might as well make it a dependency for the kinds of use cases Shakti or J get used for in business.
- SifJar 7y agoAt present, there is a hard requirement, but from what I've heard, it is to be lifted in future
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]