[Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Re: Random forest in Pharo
btc at openinworld.com
Sun Oct 18 15:56:54 UTC 2015
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 2:25 AM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.withers at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, exactly. I do realize I was consciously changing that effort
> synchronization order.
I see 64-bit being higher priority than multi-threaded for the wider
community. Dealing with larger in-Image data opens the door to more
corporate project/funding opportunities. Also simplifying the install
on modern Linux platforms without requiring additional 386 libraries
will help acceptance there.
> It is my humble opinion, without really knowing, that 64-bit would have to be redone after the MTVM completes.
I would assume it was the other way around. Presuming that Eliot has
sponsors influencing his priorities, it seems given that 64-bits will
happen first. I would guess any MTVM development on the old vm would
then need to be reworked.
> I was doing so with the idea in mind that I and others
> might dig into working on the VM, for threading support, while Eliot
> maintains focus on 64-bits...a tall order, I know.
The usual downside of splitting resources applies. There are not that
many "others" and maybe they would be drawn away from helping with the
64-bit vm. If the 64-bit vm goes slower for lack of resources then
your footing for MTVM will shifting for a longer time. You may
ultimately get where you want to go faster by helping with the 64-bit
vm. The rapport built with other vm devs from working on 64-bit might
could then be applied to MTVM. (Of course, its your free time, so you
should pursue what interests you.)
> I was barely familiar with the VM, slang, interpreter, it years ago...
> I'm totally unfamiliar with cog.
The experience you gain from working beside Esteban and Eliot on
64-bit Cog/Spur could then be applied to a MTVM.
btw, you may find these threads interesting...
>I believe another item on that list ought to be modernizing slang. So
> many big items!
> On 10/16/2015 12:48 PM, Stephan Eggermont wrote:
>> On 16-10-15 14:05, Robert Withers wrote:
>>> Because of that assumption I've made and without the responsibilities
>>> you have, Esteban, but recognizing modernizing NB to FFI, my desired
>>> list is:
>> I would expect the least total effort to be needed by keeping the work
>> of Esteban and Eliot as much as possible aligned. That is what Esteban's
>> list achieves.
More information about the Vm-dev