[M3devel] operator overloading?

[Daniel Alejandro Benavides D.]

Hi all:
I think the basic building blocks are ready, just that need assembling.
One must see however how it must be the model for each non-compliant hardware platform, the Modula-3 system works in such advanced simulations fortunately, like for cache mechanisms and computer models:
http://www.liacs.nl/CS/HPC/apparc-deliverables/PME4a.html
and
http://www.liacs.nl/CS/HPC/apparc-deliverables/HwA6.html
however are not parallel per-se but a later version was to be built to do that.
Also to note that there is some  work on GPGPU.org, although its in initial state they are pushing for getting the platform running accelerated in it.

Thank in advance 

--- El vie, 21/1/11, Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es> escribió:

> De: Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] operator overloading?
> Para: "Henning Thielemann" <schlepptop at henning-thielemann.de>, "Dragiša Durić" <dragisha at m3w.org>
> CC: "m3devel" <m3devel at elegosoft.com>
> Fecha: viernes, 21 de enero, 2011 14:54
> Hi all:
> there are some tools already to do that kind of computing
> like in the Modula-3* (see: http://books.google.com/books?id=D67qFdGbrw0C&lpg=PA276&ots=-0xGnTICFX&dq=vlsi%20modula3&pg=PA276#v=onepage&q&f=false
> ), Model Language (see: http://www.isys.uni-klu.ac.at/PDF/1996-0020-StBo.pdf )
> or the Modula-3D (see: ftp://ftp.cs.caltech.edu/tr/cs-tr-93-15.ps.Z
> ), indeed for that kind of problems too, which address the
> source level language part automatically,
> semi-automatically, or syntactically-oriented
> correspondingly, they could be managed as like language
> expression extensions or addressed as special language
> pragmas, so can be run on any kind or types of machines,
> like without FPU see Modula-3D report, etc.
> Besides that there is a source compatible framework which
> allows to detect such type of programming more
> comprehensibly and automatically if so that could be
> extended too, click on Look inside on:
> http://www.springerlink.com/content/2k65413251m333rp/
> We do have the distributed framework CM3-IDE to offer that
> additional kind service if so
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> --- El vie, 21/1/11, Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es>
> escribió:
> 
> > De: Daniel Alejandro Benavides D. <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es>
> > Asunto: Re: [M3devel] operator overloading?
> > Para: "Henning Thielemann" <schlepptop at henning-thielemann.de>,
> "Dragiša Durić" <dragisha at m3w.org>
> > CC: "m3devel" <m3devel at elegosoft.com>
> > Fecha: viernes, 21 de enero, 2011 12:40
> > Hi all:
> > I think besides is a needed feature and is in the
> Green
> > Book to have arithmetic overflow.
> > The longer I see this, I came to see that we would
> need to
> > simulate each arithmetic overflow case to see whether
> is ALU
> > or FPU model we have that. This requires simulation
> overhead
> > in the compiler but I guess the option would be have
> this
> > infrastructure for source language compliance, thus
> allowing
> > not compliant hardware to solve this issues with
> something
> > like this, see:
> > http://nvl.nist.gov/pub/nistpubs/jres/101/2/j2anut.pdf
> > In any case there might not be too much delay for
> > architectures such as VLSI.
> > Thanks in advance
> > 
> > --- El jue, 20/1/11, Dragiša Durić <dragisha at m3w.org>
> > escribió:
> > 
> > > De: Dragiša Durić <dragisha at m3w.org>
> > > Asunto: Re: [M3devel] operator overloading?
> > > Para: "Henning Thielemann" <schlepptop at henning-thielemann.de>
> > > CC: "m3devel" <m3devel at elegosoft.com>
> > > Fecha: jueves, 20 de enero, 2011 16:46
> > > openssl library implements arbitrary
> > > precision integers, and I am using it on
> Windows,
> > Linux and
> > > OSX. My binding is not complete but is useful,
> and I
> > can
> > > submit it to cm3 for use/extending/...
> > > 
> > > dd
> > > 
> > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 9:30 PM, Henning Thielemann
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Tony Hosking schrieb:
> > > >> 
> > > >> 
> > > >> On Nov 21, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Jay K
> wrote:
> > > >> 
> > > >>>> I'm now starting to wish that we
> had
> > left
> > > LONGINT out,
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> 
> > > >>> Just now? :)
> > > >>> (This is another reason I'm somewhat
> open
> > to
> > > tediously using
> > > >>> Target.Int in frontend,
> > > >>> in case we do lose LONGINT.)
> > > >> 
> > > >> What it really suggests is that we need
> a
> > proper
> > > infinite precision
> > > >> integer library.  Do we have one
> > somewhere
> > > already?
> > > > 
> > > > I have coded BigInteger in arithmetic
> package. It
> > is
> > > not tuned in any
> > > > way (no Fourier transform and such tricks)
> and
> > may
> > > contain bugs. You may
> > > > better call GNU multi precision library
> GMP.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>