[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Vectorizing Dylan?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org, Scott_Fahlman@SEF-PMAX.SLISP.CS.CMU.EDU
- Subject: Re: Vectorizing Dylan?
- From: email@example.com (Andrew LM Shalit)
- Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 17:04:45 -0500
- Cc: info-dylan@CAMBRIDGE.APPLE.COM
At 10:23 AM 10/26/92 -0500, Scott_Fahlman@SEF-PMAX.SLISP.CS.CMU.EDU wrote:
> Since you are working on a language for the 1990ies, where I expect
> to see more vector processors than today, I wonder whether it would
> not be appropriate to include vectorizing constructs into Dylan from
> the beginning.
> This sounds like a good job for a library. The nice thing about the way
> Dylan is being organized is that there's no sharp division between what's
> "in" the language and what is available as a well-known and widely used
> library. The trick will be to get this package out early and in solid
> The only tricky thing will be to make sure that the rules for sealing and
> inlining are such that a compiler can take advantage of any primitive
> high-speed vector operations that a machine might support. But this same
> requirement comes up all over the place (for example, in a machine whose
> ALU supports SIN or MULTIPLY/ACCUMULATE or operations on primitive ASCII
> strings), and I'm sure it's being worked on by the Dylan designers.
Yes, it is. The purpose of sealing is to allow this kind of efficient