3 ms·
It's unfortunate that the terms "front-end" and "back-end" are so overloaded. In this case I thought they meant a compiler backend, but that doesn't make much s
by _bxg1 6y ago
It's unfortunate that the terms "front-end" and "back-end" are so overloaded. In this case I thought they meant a compiler backend, but that doesn't make much sense in context because the "backend" would be that which targets WASM itself, which is not new. And then some might think they meant it in the web sense; i.e. something running on a server. But it sounds like there is actually yet another sense of the term, in the context of ML.
- leonwanghui 6y agoSorry for making the terms "front-end" and "back-end" ambiguous here, maybe I should have added some terminology context at beginning. In my initial thought, these two terms are named based on the machine learning framework. Front-ends normally indicate the user-oriented high level API (such like keras, PyTorch, MindSpore), and on the other hand the backend means the execution environment (CPU, GPU, Ascend, etc.) of operators. In this context, what we want to build is a hardware-agnostic backend by leveraging WASM backend, not just the compiler backend, we want to deploy the generated *.wasm operator library across hardware platforms (Cloud, Edge, Mobile, IoT, etc). Does that make sense to you?
- _bxg1 6y agoIt's not your fault! I'm sure if I were more familiar with ML it would've been clear. I just think it's amusing/unideal the way we've come to use those terms for so many different things.