News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Fortran. Parent comment

Re:Fortran by whartung on Monday August 28, 2023 @01:48PM (#37297853)
So, I have a question (I didn't real the LANL paper, save for the highlights above, but I did read your initial post that you linked to).

And this isn't meant as some kind of bait, just honest intellectual curiosity (its the internet so you can't see how it presented, just read the raw words).

Simply, why is it important for Fortran to survive in this space? Why not let the field move on? Why fight this fight?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by certik on Monday August 28, 2023 @02:34PM (#37298568)
It's a great question. I think we answered it in one of our initial blog posts when we started LFortran:

https://lfortran.org/blog/2019/05/why-to-use-fortran-for-new...

Let me know if you have any follow up questions.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by tomrod on Monday August 28, 2023 @02:01PM (#37298049)
BLAS/LAPACK (fortran blobs) are the miracle that all AI relies on (to my understanding). I hope we keep it around and maintained.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by WanderPanda on Monday August 28, 2023 @06:37PM (#37301278)
I wonder why the cascaded triple for loop for GEMM is not just hardcoded in assembly for each architecture. And while we are at it, why is MKL > 5GB again?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by tomrod on Monday August 28, 2023 @10:05PM (#37302675)
Does this address your MKL question?[1] If so, sounds like we're two of today's lucky 10,000![0] Although for this esoterica, I'd probably reduce that to 10.

[0] https://xkcd.com/1053/

[1] https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Libr...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fortran by zzzoom on Thursday September 07, 2023 @09:47PM (#37428275)
Most decent BLAS implementations use some variation of the kernels in K. Goto et al. "Anatomy of High-Performance Matrix Multiplication" written in assembly.
[ Parent | on HN ]