[Pharo-dev] [Vm-dev] Re: Random forest in Pharo

Ben Coman btc at openinworld.com
Mon Oct 19 15:06:51 UTC 2015


On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:55 PM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.withers at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your response, Ben. I'm here to help where I may be helpful,
> so let me know where. I have interest in the Pi and the ARM simulator was
> expressed as an area needing more resources. 64-bit is the strategic effort,
> so if I can help.

You may find these interesting...
* http://forum.world.st/ARM-Cog-progress-td4827195.html
* http://markmail.org/message/tfqa4lgriw6xchh3
* http://www.slideshare.net/esug/pharo-arm-status

> I'd hope we could agree that whether is goes 64-bit then MT (which is what's
> up) or MT then 64-bit (as I was so rashly suggesting) there will be an
> integration cost.

Agreed, but I guess the former shares that cost amongst more people.

> As 64-bit is a Spur ObjectMemory effort and MT is a
> process/stack oriented facet, are they not orthogonal and fairly
> non-interfering, aside from a few touch points. If there is integration
> cost, why not proceed in parallel?

Naturally you'll get more support working in an area where the vm devs
*need* more help, but I can't judge this. I'm not familiar with what
the interference points might be.
Maybe this helps...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/2014-October/016781.html

> Certainly the discussion about what exactly MT is seems alright.

Sure.  MT has several meanings.  Its good to scope a common understanding.

> I'm guessing the answer to that you have mentioned: resources. We need a
> bunch of hardcore CompSci students to catch the fire.
>
> Please let me know where I can help best. Rapport is key to team, this I
> have experienced.

I learn a lot listening in on [vm-dev], but I've still only dabbled
around the fringe of the vm.  The best reference is Eliot overall and
Esteban from a Pharo perspective.
btw, have you seen...
* http://www.mirandabanda.org/cogblog/cog-projects/

cheers -ben


> Regards,
> Robert
>
>
> On 10/18/2015 11:56 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
>>
>>
>> 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...
>> *
>> http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/2015-April/108648.html
>> *
>> http://forum.world.st/Copy-on-write-for-a-multithreaded-VM-td4837905.html
>>
>> cheers -ben
>>
>>> I believe another item on that list ought to be modernizing slang. So
>>> many big items!
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Stephan


More information about the Vm-dev mailing list