On 6 February 2012 07:22, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote: > mark florisson, 06.02.2012 00:12: >> On 5 February 2012 22:39, Dimitri Tcaciuc wrote: >>> 3. Does it make sense to make OpenCL more explicit? Heuristics and >>> automatic switching between, say, CPU and GPU is great for eg. Sage >>> users, but maybe not so much if you know exactly what you're doing >>> with your machine resources. E.g just having a library with thin >>> cython-adapted wrappers would be awesome. I imagine this can be >>> augmented by arrays having a knowledge of device-side/client-side >>> (which would go towards addressing the issue 1. above) >> >> Hm, there are several advantages to supporting this in the language. > > ... and there's always the obvious disadvantage of making the language too > complex and magic to learn and understand. Worth balancing.
Definitely. This would however introduce very minor changes to the language (no new syntax at least, just a few memoryview methods), but more major changes to the compiler. The support would mostly be transparent. Clyther (http://srossross.github.com/Clyther/) is a related project, which does a similar thing by compiling python (bytecode) to opencl. What I want for Cython is something even more transparent, the user wouldn't perhaps even know opencl was involved, and the compiler has more control over how data is handled. > Stefan > _______________________________________________ > cython-devel mailing list > cython-devel@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel _______________________________________________ cython-devel mailing list cython-devel@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
