4 ms·
Mojo may be interesting to me, but they should really split it from Max, which is some closed stuff I'm not interested in. They should show some performance c
by xiphias2 2mo ago
Mojo may be interesting to me, but they should really split it from Max, which is some closed stuff I'm not interested in.
They should show some performance comparisions between PyTorch and Mojo, PyTorch+kernel compilation + Triton vs Mojo, ThunderKittens vs Mojo.
- embedding-shape 2mo ago> They should show some performance comparisions between PyTorch and Mojo, PyTorch+kernel compilation + Triton vs Mojo, ThunderKittens vs Mojo. The fact that they release 1.0 without doing this, I think says a lot. I personally haven't even started looking into Mojo because of the closed source stuff, but usually you can tell what's going on by looking for what's obviously missing.
- pbronez 2mo agoAren’t they already separated? Max is an inference runtime, written in Mojolang, which uses the MLIR compiler chain to target diverse accelerator hardware.
- geodel 2mo agoThey kind of did. It has a separate website now [1] . All the docs, announcements, roadmap, some comparisons as you asked are there. So they do seem to be working towards separation. 1. https://mojolang.org/ https://mojolang.org/
- xiphias2 2mo agoThanks, it's so boring and disappointing. LLVM has such a cool tutorial, eventhough I haven't written a programming language myself, it was excitung to go through it to see how static programming languages are lowered to SSA form. Mojo should have something showing how to write a super fast matmul and especially what's interesting for me is a fast linear attention kernel, as that's where PyTorch is getting much harder to use.
- adityazero 2mo ago[dead]