Originally Posted by Drago
Still, information seems a bit scattered all over the place.
GPGPU + CPU + Possibly other stuff == New multicore computer architecture.
Originally Posted by rrohbeck
So AMD is releasing software that will help people develop compilers and libraries to take advantage of it.
We post info to the xorg wiki first then update amd.com later. Looks like we need another sync there.
Originally Posted by entropy
The 3D programming docco on the xorg wiki covers from 6xx through NI pretty well since they all use the same core architecture. It wouldn't hurt to add delta docs for things like attribute interpolation in the shaders, although the ISA docs and driver code also cover the changes. SI needs an all new docco set and that should probably be highest priority.
Well CISC is not RISC and does not decode anything in RISC (that is recompiling), decoding is another thing. RISC means relative instructions (one is little the other, or, continuation of another), CISC is the opposite (complex relations between instructions). CISC cannot execute directly many instructions, so executes them in Micro-Ops (frames in space or in time), its the only way for a CISC because 20-30 different units is not possible, instead 7 units are good wille RISC can have only 1 (vector registers). Micro-Ops are not RISC because are not relative and are not instructions. RISC is 20 times smaller for the same general processing power and 40 times smaller for stream processing like gaming, and thats because you cant find any game with static compiled graphics in order to use the complexity.
Whoops, my bad too... I completely forgot about that. We actually had docco in a third place -- the Stream (now APP) SDK web pages, so agd5f built a list to wrap them all. Apologies if it was someone else than agd5f
Note that this opinion has not been re-evaluated in recent years. That is, everyone uses EDG because everyone uses EDG and there weren't any alternatives (GCC's frontend is not only GPL'd, it's also a ****ing nightmare to integrate into anything else, GPL'd or not). Clang has sprung into existence just a few years ago and is already at the same level of C++11 support as GCC. One can expect that in the coming years, a lot of tools may well migrate from EDG to Clang. The ones that don't will mostly be those monstrous clunking behemoths for which replacing the frontend would be far too much work, or those that have invested too heavily in modifying the EDG-based frontend (like Microsoft's compiler, which lags in C++11 because it's essentially a fork of an ancient version of EDG, but all of the crazy Microsoft extensions like C++/CLi and C++/Cx only exist in that frontend).
Originally Posted by ldesnogu