Comments on: Response to Bill McColl’s parallelism post http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/ HPC News Without the Noise for Supercomputing Professionals | insideHPC Fri, 03 May 2013 04:44:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Domain-Specific Parallel Programming http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-112357 Domain-Specific Parallel Programming Fri, 31 Oct 2008 22:28:19 +0000 http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-112357 [...] universality that languages such as C, C++ and Java have achieved in sequential computing. My own view, based on more than 20 years of research in this area, is that this is very unlikely, certainly in [...] [...] universality that languages such as C, C++ and Java have achieved in sequential computing. My own view, based on more than 20 years of research in this area, is that this is very unlikely, certainly in [...]

]]> By: Computing at Scale » Blog Archive » Domain-Specific Parallel Programming http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-56505 Computing at Scale » Blog Archive » Domain-Specific Parallel Programming Sun, 11 May 2008 07:47:49 +0000 http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-56505 [...] universality that languages such as C, C++ and Java have achieved in sequential computing. My own view, based on more than 20 years of research in this area, is that this is very unlikely, certainly in [...] [...] universality that languages such as C, C++ and Java have achieved in sequential computing. My own view, based on more than 20 years of research in this area, is that this is very unlikely, certainly in [...]

]]> By: HPCer http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-50921 HPCer Thu, 17 Apr 2008 18:09:20 +0000 http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-50921 "The growing consensus is that control-flow languages are on the way out and X is the new vogue" Look back through recent history, and you could find statements that put 4GLs, fuzzy logic, AI, and many other technologies in for X. Not saying Stream couldn't be a big deal, but I'm not sure I'd call it a consensus just yet. “The growing consensus is that control-flow languages are on the way out and X is the new vogue”

Look back through recent history, and you could find statements that put 4GLs, fuzzy logic, AI, and many other technologies in for X. Not saying Stream couldn’t be a big deal, but I’m not sure I’d call it a consensus just yet.

]]> By: Amir http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-49947 Amir Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:44:39 +0000 http://insidehpc.com/2008/04/14/response-to-bill-mccolls-parallelism-post/#comment-49947 The growing consensus is that control-flow languages are on the way out and explicit dataflow graph programming (aka "stream programming") is the new vogue. I expect the spreadsheet will continue to be the most popular language and killer application in the parallel computing age. Spreadsheets are particularly good at expressing parallel dataflow graphs and large SIMD operations and you already know how to use them. The growing consensus is that control-flow languages are on the way out and explicit dataflow graph programming (aka “stream programming”) is the new vogue.

I expect the spreadsheet will continue to be the most popular language and killer application in the parallel computing age. Spreadsheets are particularly good at expressing parallel dataflow graphs and large SIMD operations and you already know how to use them.

]]>