Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Nostalgic. Interesting. But single thread? (Score 1) 3

Nope dude. Wrong argument! Speeding up a single thread is like speeding up each individual thread, in addition to your Ahmdahl's (dunno what you really meant there). Make single-thread faster then all threads become faster which makes the program faster. Multi-threading is not a magic, just means there are multiple single threads running with each other so single thread is always relevant. LOL@nostalgic btw.

Comment Doesn't this mean iPhone needs serious work! (Score 1) 3

I see his point that in-order cores are becoming common. I mean iPhone has an in-order core and they are common, hence in-order cores are common ... no debate. What I am thinking about is the importance of the optimizations Shouldn't all iPhone app developers know about these optimizations? This seems like it can be a big win for all cell phone developers to follow some of these techniques. I do notice some very slow apps on my iphone and wonder his arguments play a role.
Programming

Submission + - Tiny cores are here, and they change programming (futurechips.org) 3

An anonymous reader writes: Intel is returning to in-order cores after two decades with Atom and Knights. ARM is already building in-order cores for iPhones, iPads, and Androids. IBM has switched to in-order cores after building generations of out-of-order cores. This indicates a clear trend that in-order cores are back in the mainstream. Highlighting the performance characteristics of in-order and out-of-order cores, Dr. Aater Suleman's article explains why programming for in-order cores is very different from programming for the now-traditional out-of-order cores. Thus, this new trend requires a change in compilers, tools, and programming techniques. Compilers need to get better at removing useless code and instruction scheduling. Programmers need to weigh new trade-offs and perform classic optimizations that have been forgotten. I liked this article particularly for the very simple code examples and a simple explanation of in-order and out-of-order differences. The message is clear: programmers and compilers need to understand in-order cores and target their code better.
Apple

Submission + - Amazon Challenges Apple With Mac App Store (computerworld.com) 1

CWmike writes: "Amazon launched a Mac-specific application download store on Thursday that will compete with Apple's nearly five-month-old Mac App Store. The new subsection of Amazon's massive online store, dubbed 'Mac Software Downloads,' kicked off quietly Thursday. Amazon has long offered software downloads for both Windows and Mac customers, but this was the first time that the company called out its Mac-centric 'store.' The retailer, however, apparently did not want to goad Apple into another legal battle by mimicking its rival's 'App Store' moniker: The two companies are already in court over Amazon's 'Appstore for Android,' which Apple claims violates its trademark. Unlike the Mac App Store, which Apple opened in early January, Amazon's includes the popular Office for Mac line from Microsoft."
Programming

Submission + - What makes parallel programming hard? (futurechips.org)

An anonymous reader writes: Intel’s Aater Suleman writes about why parallel programming is difficult. He uses real life code examples to show why finding parallelism is difficult and specifying it is a daunting task. I was unaware of the fact that a major challenge in multi-threaded programming lies in optimizing parallel programs, not just getting them to run. Aater Suleman presented a full case study (http://www.futurechips.org/tips-for-power-coders/writing-optimizing-parallel-programs-complete.html) of how code is parallelized and the kind of issues parallel programmers must tackle to get high performance. His analysis is insightful and the case study is very enlightening if you are unfamiliar with parallel code debugging. His article has already been featured on sites like insidehpc.com and multicore.info .
Idle

Submission + - Nazis taught some dogs to speak, others to talk. (nzherald.co.nz)

An anonymous reader writes: Durring WW2, some dogs have ability to speak primitives in language such as tapping their paws to answer or barking for different symbol responses to an alphabet, but many German Shepherds were taught and even learned to talk in complete sentences! Talking dogs trained in Germany were part of the war effort, as was Adolf and Herman being strong proponents of animal rights. Animal Psychologists appeared in Germany in the decade of 1920's and there reports were that some species of dogs were judged to be capable of almost human-like intelligence, even participating in thought-provoking activities and processes.

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...