4 ms·
The Dex authors are also core Autograd & JAX authors, so they're not unaware of the benefits of the dense Numpy-style APIs. The challenge is that many numerica
by alevskaya 6y ago
The Dex authors are also core Autograd & JAX authors, so they're not unaware of the benefits of the dense Numpy-style APIs. The challenge is that many numerical kernels and algorithms are just not easily or naturally expressed in this vectorized language. (Think sparsity, irregular access patterns, control flow, etc.)
Current languages, runtimes and hardware currently force most work into this dense, rectangular, vectorized style to achieve reasonable performance, but we would like our ideas to not always remain stuck in this "rut" [1]. Dex is one exploration of how we can improve expressiveness and generality while still allowing for performant compiled artifacts.
[1]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3317550.3321441 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3317550.3321441
- marmaduke 6y agoHa I’m well aware and completely agree actually but autograd is written as if they wanted to use Haskell. The author’s thesis mentions functional purity etc and debugging or instrumenting autograd is predictably challenging given that Python is not Haskell. I think Futhark, Dex, Jax etc are great. NumPy is still the baseline to beat (for general usage).