A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Intel
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and'start fixing real problems'



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old July 18th 20, 03:30 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and 'start fixing real problems'

In article , Brian Gregory
wrote:

I remember - I _think_ it was in the last decade, but it might have been
more - being startled when I spoke to a young computing graduate, to
find he'd never done any assembler. At that time, after my initial
double-take, I thought to myself: the field is big enough, that there'll
be plenty of room for him, and in practice he'll probably never have any
trouble finding interesting and well-paid employment.


there is no need for assembler anymore, except in very rare
circumstances.


On PCs maybe.


on just about everything.

it's *really* difficult for a human to write assembler that's better
than what a modern compiler can produce, plus doing so would take a
*lot* longer.

I bet some embedded stuff for ultra cheap mass market stuff is still
done in assember, or something only very slightly higher level.


you'd lose that bet.
  #62  
Old July 18th 20, 03:30 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and 'start fixing real problems'

In article , J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:

I remember - I _think_ it was in the last decade, but it might have
been
more - being startled when I spoke to a young computing graduate, to
find he'd never done any assembler. At that time, after my initial
double-take, I thought to myself: the field is big enough, that there'll
be plenty of room for him, and in practice he'll probably never have any
trouble finding interesting and well-paid employment.
there is no need for assembler anymore, except in very rare
circumstances.


On PCs maybe.

I bet some embedded stuff for ultra cheap mass market stuff is still
done in assember, or something only very slightly higher level.

Yes. Define "need". Compact code is noticeably more efficient - so runs
faster. Yes, for a lot of things, the returns don't justify the effort -
for a lot of things that are only done once, or where speed doesn't
matter, or - these days - to _some_ extent where modern processor power
can hide the inefficiency of the code.


compact code is not necessarily more efficient. a simple example is an
unrolled loop, which is less compact yet will run faster. another is
having a large lookup table versus calculating a value each time.

however, modern processors are far from simple, which is one reason why
a compiler can do a better job of optimization than humans can.

and then there's the issue of portability. anything written in a high
level language can be recompiled for another processor, normally with
little to no problem, whereas anything in assembler would need to be
entirely rewritten from scratch.

I suspect IrfanView, for example, is mostly coded in either assembler,
or at least quite low-level code (or just possibly using an excellent
optimiser - which are rare with ultra-high-level languages, such as
scripting interpreters).


it's highly unlikely any of it is in assembler.
  #63  
Old July 18th 20, 05:06 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Jeff Barnett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions'and 'start fixing real problems'

On 7/17/2020 8:30 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:

I remember - I _think_ it was in the last decade, but it might have
been
more - being startled when I spoke to a young computing graduate, to
find he'd never done any assembler. At that time, after my initial
double-take, I thought to myself: the field is big enough, that there'll
be plenty of room for him, and in practice he'll probably never have any
trouble finding interesting and well-paid employment.
there is no need for assembler anymore, except in very rare
circumstances.


On PCs maybe.

I bet some embedded stuff for ultra cheap mass market stuff is still
done in assember, or something only very slightly higher level.

Yes. Define "need". Compact code is noticeably more efficient - so runs
faster. Yes, for a lot of things, the returns don't justify the effort -
for a lot of things that are only done once, or where speed doesn't
matter, or - these days - to _some_ extent where modern processor power
can hide the inefficiency of the code.


compact code is not necessarily more efficient. a simple example is an
unrolled loop, which is less compact yet will run faster. another is
having a large lookup table versus calculating a value each time.


That depends on the length of the loop body and the number of
iterations: crossing cache boundaries can extract performance hits. In
fact, unrolling some loops can punish performance by factors of tens or
even hundreds. If you carry your argument far enough and force paging
you may cause arbitrary slow downs. As to look up tables the problems
are the same. If all the values and indices fit in a small amount of
storage (i.e. they are COMPACT), well and good. Otherwise all hell can
break loose.

however, modern processors are far from simple, which is one reason why
a compiler can do a better job of optimization than humans can.


Almost always true and more so as the years go by.

and then there's the issue of portability. anything written in a high
level language can be recompiled for another processor, normally with
little to no problem, whereas anything in assembler would need to be
entirely rewritten from scratch.


Unless you are coding in C or one of its derivatives. There are enough
places where a C compiler can choose the meaning of an expression (and
not necessarily consistently) that you have to code in a modest subset
of the language. And find a compatible compiler for portability.

I suspect IrfanView, for example, is mostly coded in either assembler,
or at least quite low-level code (or just possibly using an excellent
optimiser - which are rare with ultra-high-level languages, such as
scripting interpreters).


Scripting interpreters are not a good example of an "ultra-high-level"
anything. Most are, in fact, among the worst documented, least reliable,
and least consistent from version to version of any software meant to be
used by non developers of that software. Of course you may argue that
they are completely consistent since documentation typically gives no
serious details of what is supposed to be done in boundary cases.

it's highly unlikely any of it is in assembler.

--
Jeff Barnett


  #64  
Old July 18th 20, 06:23 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
T[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions'and 'start fixing real problems'

On 2020-07-17 17:32, VanguardLH wrote:
T wrote:

And college was no better.


I *hated* college. So freaking s-l-o-w. 3 months to read a book and
take a test. Really? C'mon, that's ridiculous. And the class didn't
even cover the entire textbook. Then they switched from quarters to
semesters, so even longer to be bored. I tested out of as many classes
as they permitted, and they wouldn't let me test out of more. They
claimed the classroom experience must also be included for a
well-rounded education. Yeah, sit in a chair and listen to a prof orate
a textbook, and his oration interrupted by stupid questions.



Well stated.

When I hit college, I was a vet. I had no patience
with condescending, arrogant, pompous blowhards.
They taught me differently than the did the children
that also attended the classes. I was responsible
for getting two teacher removed for not doing
their jobs.

Several teachers said they liked teaching vets because
there was no subterfuge. We were there for a reason
the EXPECTED them to do their part. No having to
herd cats.

I also hate(d) school. The first day on campus after
six years of military service and one medal, when I
stepped foot on campus, I literally shook. "What in
God name am I doing to myself?" I graduated in 4-1/4
years whilst working full time WITHOUT ONE SINGLE
SOLITARY EXTRA CREDIT. I was working as a full
engineer in my 3rd year of college.

  #65  
Old July 18th 20, 06:26 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
T[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions'and 'start fixing real problems'

On 2020-07-17 18:18, Brian Gregory wrote:
On 17/07/2020 17:31, nospam wrote:
In article , J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:

I remember - I _think_ it was in the last decade, but it might have been
more - being startled when I spoke to a young computing graduate, to
find he'd never done any assembler. At that time, after my initial
double-take, I thought to myself: the field is big enough, that there'll
be plenty of room for him, and in practice he'll probably never have any
trouble finding interesting and well-paid employment.


there is no need for assembler anymore, except in very rare
circumstances.


On PCs maybe.

I bet some embedded stuff for ultra cheap mass market stuff is still
done in assember, or something only very slightly higher level.


We build little computers with parts. Then went to
CPU. All assembly code!
  #66  
Old July 18th 20, 06:29 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
T[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions'and 'start fixing real problems'

On 2020-07-17 17:10, VanguardLH wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

I think we used interns for 6 months: the contract length. Never
again thereafter.


Why did you use them in the first place - was it because of some form of
state subsidy, of about that duration?


I wasn't in the decision loop. At a weekly status meeting, our manager
said, "Guess what?" followed by a groan. Whenever he said that, we'd
get quiet waiting for yet another edict from management.

Training (the same group that taught us) took care of classes,
instructional CDs, and documentation but QA did the progress monitoring
and tutoring to make sure the interns got up to speed in 2 weeks. We
stretched it to 3 weeks to also train them on our QA procedures. They
did okay during the training phase probably because it was similar to
school, but more accelerated, like a seminar. However, When they were
on their own to do the actual testing, and despite the retro tests were
complete (no decisions to make, and previously reviewed with feedback
from outside our group to make sure any tech could follow them), was
when they got, um, slow and "lost". We changed from weekly status
meetings to still doing those but with me going around to everyone (not
just interns) to get a daily status update to see who needed more help,
discover any snags, talk to the boss about possible resource
reallocation, or gauge the severity of peril to our testing schedule.

Maybe our expectation was too high. We had programmers that left
because they couldn't take the stress or didn't have the flair for
digging into a product to thoroughly test it. I got offered a
programming position but declined because it was too boring. We had
expection of getting and training new-hires, just as we were once, but
the interns just never became adept. Could be they knew they were going
back to just school and they'd be leaving us hence no motivation for
long-term motivation (although there was the prospect of getting hired
if they performed well). Would you keep going to the gym to stay
healthy if you knew you were getting killed in 6 months?


In my college, they mixed the upper tier and lower tier
courses. Electronics 101 had about 200+ folks in it.
Standing room only. At the end, there was only about
15 of us. We all knew each other by name

  #67  
Old July 18th 20, 06:33 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
T[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 49
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions'and 'start fixing real problems'

On 2020-07-17 21:06, Jeff Barnett wrote:
Scripting interpreters are not a good example of an "ultra-high-level"
anything. Most are, in fact, among the worst documented, least reliable,
and least consistent from version to version of any software meant to be
used by non developers of that software. Of course you may argue that
they are completely consistent since documentation typically gives no
serious¬*details¬*of¬*what¬*is¬*supposed¬*to¬*be¬* done¬*in¬*boundary¬*cases.


Perl 5 has wonderful documentation (PerlDocs).

Raku's (Perl 6's) absolutely suck. They are
written as a refresher for those that already
know what they are doing. They are not completely
useless, just really close to useless. And often
have mistakes in them.

I program a lot in Raku. I love the language,
but not the docs.

  #68  
Old July 18th 20, 07:09 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and 'start fixing real problems'

In article , Jeff Barnett
wrote:

I bet some embedded stuff for ultra cheap mass market stuff is still
done in assember, or something only very slightly higher level.

Yes. Define "need". Compact code is noticeably more efficient - so runs
faster. Yes, for a lot of things, the returns don't justify the effort -
for a lot of things that are only done once, or where speed doesn't
matter, or - these days - to _some_ extent where modern processor power
can hide the inefficiency of the code.


compact code is not necessarily more efficient. a simple example is an
unrolled loop, which is less compact yet will run faster. another is
having a large lookup table versus calculating a value each time.


That depends on the length of the loop body and the number of
iterations: crossing cache boundaries can extract performance hits. In
fact, unrolling some loops can punish performance by factors of tens or
even hundreds. If you carry your argument far enough and force paging
you may cause arbitrary slow downs. As to look up tables the problems
are the same. If all the values and indices fit in a small amount of
storage (i.e. they are COMPACT), well and good. Otherwise all hell can
break loose.


they were simple examples to make a point. they were not meant to be a
treatise on every possible scenario.

however, modern processors are far from simple, which is one reason why
a compiler can do a better job of optimization than humans can.


Almost always true and more so as the years go by.


yep.

and then there's the issue of portability. anything written in a high
level language can be recompiled for another processor, normally with
little to no problem, whereas anything in assembler would need to be
entirely rewritten from scratch.


Unless you are coding in C or one of its derivatives. There are enough
places where a C compiler can choose the meaning of an expression (and
not necessarily consistently) that you have to code in a modest subset
of the language. And find a compatible compiler for portability.


c is not an issue unless the programmer makes mistakes and ignores any
compiler warnings.

I suspect IrfanView, for example, is mostly coded in either assembler,
or at least quite low-level code (or just possibly using an excellent
optimiser - which are rare with ultra-high-level languages, such as
scripting interpreters).


Scripting interpreters are not a good example of an "ultra-high-level"
anything. Most are, in fact, among the worst documented, least reliable,
and least consistent from version to version of any software meant to be
used by non developers of that software. Of course you may argue that
they are completely consistent since documentation typically gives no
serious details of what is supposed to be done in boundary cases.


irfanview isn't using a scripting interpreter.

it's highly unlikely any of it is in assembler.

  #69  
Old July 18th 20, 07:09 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 160
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and 'start fixing real problems'

In article , wrote:


We build little computers with parts. Then went to
CPU. All assembly code!


that doesn't make any sense.
  #70  
Old July 18th 20, 07:37 AM posted to alt.windows7.general,alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
VanguardLH[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,453
Default Linux founder tells Intel to stop inventing 'magic instructions' and 'start fixing real problems'

One day a prof arrived just before his class, put his hat on his desk,
but got busy elsewhere. When he got back and very late for class, all
the students had left. The next day he declared, "When my hat is on my
desk, that's the same as I'm here." The next day the students came in,
put hats on their chairs, and left.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
fans start-stop-start when booting [email protected] Homebuilt PC's 4 November 21st 14 06:25 PM
PC power on - start, stop, start, stop, etc - eventually powers up spodosaurus Homebuilt PC's 10 December 27th 08 02:55 PM
Intel CEO tells us to buy a Mac YKhan General 7 May 28th 05 06:01 AM
InfoWorld: Global Standards Are Key, Intel CEO Tells Chinese Execs Dionaea muscipula Intel 2 April 9th 04 07:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2022 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.