qayxc

44 ms·

451.
by qayxc 5y ago
Unfortunately it seems as if there's too much ad-hoc naming going on as opposed to a reasonable set of conventions.
452.
by qayxc 5y ago
Just like producing any kind of industrial product, the issue is NIH-syndrome. Sure you won't be able to compete with the likes of GPT-3, but no one is suggesting you should. The key is to treat software as a commodity and apply it as
453.
by qayxc 5y ago
My guess is that they don't want to distort results. Any kind of scoring would present an incentive to start cheating (e.g. by not checking the "I've seen this before"-box), be it consciously or subconsciously. From the
454.
by qayxc 5y ago
I take it you've never actually been to Barcelona?
455.
by qayxc 5y ago
> It’s called a Hardware Description Language. According to my textbooks, they’re the industry standard So when confronted with a faulty circuit board with multimeter in hand and bench power supply on stand-by, you are looking at VHDL li
456.
by qayxc 5y ago
They have ROCm and many popular frameworks support it. The problem is that NVIDIA has 100% of the mindshare and owns 97% of the dGPU market so it's a self-fullfilling prophecy that proprietary tech like CUDA will stay dominant in the f
457.
by qayxc 5y ago
You seem to overlook the fact that NVIDIA poured immense resources into their ML software stack. This was back in AMD's Bulldozer days (2011), when the company struggled both financially and technologically. Meanwhile NVIDIA sponsored
458.
by qayxc 5y ago
Desktop is OK for the most part, hybrid graphics on Laptop can still be a living nightmare, though. Every other driver update breaks the system in unexpected ways, Wayland wasn't supported for the longest time, switching GPUs had no su
459.
by qayxc 5y ago
It seems a bit outdated to me. Just for fun, I tried the last example (VC ugliness, 16.3, example 1.) and got this warning C4293: '>>': shift count negative or too big, undefined behavior and a program output of -1 us
460.
by qayxc 5y ago
But isn't all this just old wine in new skins? Is there really a difference between "labelling data" and assigning properties to "traditional" inputs (e.g. assigning tax codes, classifying new products, filing cases
461.
by qayxc 5y ago
Which makes you require software again, so what's the point exactly? A cool idea for a logo stored as SVG cannot be visualised by a human, neither can text data rows of a CT scan or a stress visualisation from an FEM or FEA simulation.
462.
by qayxc 5y ago
> there's SPICE for regular electronic circuits and SysVerilog et al for logic circuits Both are inputs for programs, not actual representations for humans to work with and -understand. Try and design or better yet fix actual hard
463.
by qayxc 5y ago
> Plain text just works, everywhere, all the time. No it doesn't. Try a plain text description of an electronic circuit vs a circuit diagram. Try a a plain text instruction sheet vs an illustrated one. Try plain text sheet music vs
464.
by qayxc 5y ago
I was referring to https://github.com/HazyResearch/blocking-tutorial/blob/maste... which upon closer inspection uses intrinsics in the inner loop, but to a much lesser degree and arguably specifying -mavx2 -m
465.
by qayxc 5y ago
> The code is likely still compiled via -O3. That doesn't matter. You have to specify the target platform as well. Just take the naive code and specify -O3 in godbolt.org for example. Assembly exerpt of the inner loop: L5:
466.
by qayxc 5y ago
Interestingly knowing vector intrinsics is exactly what optimising compilers are good at. The article even shows that - look at the C++ code - no instrisics in sight, just pure basic C++ getting the optimisation and performance from the com
467.
by qayxc 5y ago
> The article's charts show that in this case, naive code gets you less than 2% the performance of an optimised implementation. That's not what the chart shows at all. The charts shows what non optimized code compiles to. Ju
468.
by qayxc 5y ago
> I think types with destructors generally require constructors too If by that you mean explicit constructors, then no. The compiler will happily generate an empty default ctor for you. Ctors in general are only useful to establish a kno
469.
by qayxc 5y ago
I don't understand the obsession with constructors. Placement new exists, but I'm not sure that's what you asked w.r.t. placement initialisation, which doesn't make much sense for non-trivial types anyway. Fallible place
470.
by qayxc 5y ago
Meanwhile in the world of forest management: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/prescribed-fire
471.
by qayxc 5y ago
How is a factory function not idiomatic? It's not as if C++ is a single paradigm language that encourages a singular style or paradigm like OO. RAII is a mess in certain circumstances (looking at you, Vulkan API) and sometimes straig
472.
by qayxc 5y ago
This image is mostly painted by people who forgot to stop. By that I mean stop using every feature and detail because it's there. C++ can be used like a much better C (smart pointers, references, const-correctness, generics via templat
473.
by qayxc 5y ago
I am very confused. Some of these ramblings are just plain wrong, like > But exceptions come at a performance cost. No they don't. An exception that isn't thrown costs nothing. Also > Let’s say I want to know if a constructo
474.
by qayxc 5y ago
Not to mention the exceptionally high correlation with low education and low income. The same data could be used to conclude that low income and lack of education are risk factors for death similar to smoking...
475.
by qayxc 5y ago
You know what costs even less? Building a larger fairing. Atlas V has different fairing sizes for different payload types as well. Sure, a bigger fairing will simplify a space telescope, but you still need to fold it and the bulk of the cos
476.
by qayxc 5y ago
The "plan" also was to land a Dragon capsule on Mars by 2018 [0]. The "plan" also was to fly people around the Moon in 2018 [1]. It's pointless to base your assessment on plans if the past showed how quickly they ev
477.
by qayxc 5y ago
With the advent of LLVM that's not common anymore. Bootstrapping can be done in pretty much any language nowadays.
478.
by qayxc 5y ago
And look what happened - the A380, an even bigger plane - was discontinued because it turned out smaller planes are more economical.
479.
by qayxc 5y ago
> Don't tell engineers what they can't do. I don't - just a small hint there: Webb fit just fine into an Ariane V fairing...
480.
by qayxc 5y ago
That wouldn't be possible - first, Starship cannot take off without significant support infrastructure, so it'd be a one-way trip. Additionally, have you seen the hatch on the Lunar Starship? That thing is ~30m above ground and on

More ›