3 ms·

I was always wondering how does it compare to halide or sycl or are those completely unrelated projects with different goals?

• Athas 3y ago
  Compared to Halide: * Futhark does not expose a scheduling language that gives you precise control over code generation. This is probably the main selling point of Halide. * Futhark has a much broader focus than Halide, which is mainly oriented towards image processing. Futhark wants to support arbitrary data parallel computation. E.g. see this compiler written in Futhark: https://github.com/Snektron/pareas https://github.com/Snektron/pareas Compared to Sycl: * Futhark is a non-embedded language that is more high level than Sycl. The goals are similar in the sense that both systems to try make (data) parallel programming more accessible. The vision behind Futhark is that the conventional functional programming vocabulary is actually a pretty good fit for parallelism, and that an aggressively optimising compiler can reduce or eliminate the overhead of abstraction. I don't think Sycl is as focused on high levels of abstraction, but rather focuses on being a relatively low-level portable programming interface.