* [Caml-list] muti-core programming
@ 2016-03-09 9:50 刘坚
2016-03-09 10:07 ` Francois Berenger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: 刘坚 @ 2016-03-09 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: caml-list
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 459 bytes --]
Hi,
I’m recently writing a formal verification tool in OCaml, and it
works really well, but I’m considering writing a concurrent version.
However, until now, there seems to be no way to write programs that take
advantage of multi-cores. So, I’m wondering when will OCaml support
multi-core programming? Or else, do I have other choices by using some
external extensions of OCaml instead of the standard library?
Thanks,
Jian
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2610 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [Caml-list] muti-core programming 2016-03-09 9:50 [Caml-list] muti-core programming 刘坚 @ 2016-03-09 10:07 ` Francois Berenger 2016-03-09 10:23 ` Mohamed Iguernlala 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Francois Berenger @ 2016-03-09 10:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list On 03/09/2016 10:50 AM, 刘坚 wrote: > Hi, > > I’m recently writing a formal verification tool in OCaml, and > it works really well, but I’m considering writing a concurrent version. > However, until now, there seems to be no way to write programs that take > advantage of multi-cores. To accelerate something, probably you want paralellism, not concurrency. I recomend parmap, but there are some other libraries out there too for that purpose (in opam: forkwork and probably others I don't know). But be careful that too fine granularity calculations don't parallelize well. For example, if you are analyzing source code, maybe analyzing distinct files in parallel would be a coarse enough granularity. > So, I’m wondering when will OCaml support > multi-core programming? Or else, do I have other choices by using some > external extensions of OCaml instead of the standard library? > > Thanks, > > Jian -- Regards, Francois. "When in doubt, use more types" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] muti-core programming 2016-03-09 10:07 ` Francois Berenger @ 2016-03-09 10:23 ` Mohamed Iguernlala 2016-03-09 11:04 ` Francois Berenger 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Mohamed Iguernlala @ 2016-03-09 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list Hi, Functory may be suitable as well (http://opam.ocaml.org/packages/functory/functory.0.5/) -- Mohamed Iguernlala. Senior R&D Engineer, OCamlPro SAS Research Associate, VALS team, LRI Le 09/03/2016 11:07, Francois Berenger a écrit : > On 03/09/2016 10:50 AM, 刘坚 wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I’m recently writing a formal verification tool in OCaml, and >> it works really well, but I’m considering writing a concurrent version. >> However, until now, there seems to be no way to write programs that take >> advantage of multi-cores. > > To accelerate something, probably you want paralellism, not concurrency. > > I recomend parmap, but there are some other libraries out there > too for that purpose (in opam: forkwork and probably others I don't > know). > > But be careful that too fine granularity calculations don't > parallelize well. > For example, if you are analyzing source code, maybe analyzing > distinct files in parallel would be a coarse enough granularity. > > > So, I’m wondering when will OCaml support >> multi-core programming? Or else, do I have other choices by using some >> external extensions of OCaml instead of the standard library? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jian > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] muti-core programming 2016-03-09 10:23 ` Mohamed Iguernlala @ 2016-03-09 11:04 ` Francois Berenger 2016-03-09 21:58 ` Yaron Minsky 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Francois Berenger @ 2016-03-09 11:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list On 03/09/2016 11:23 AM, Mohamed Iguernlala wrote: > Hi, > > Functory may be suitable as well > (http://opam.ocaml.org/packages/functory/functory.0.5/) and maybe lwt-parallel by Ivan Gotovchits or procord by Cryptosense; all available libraries in opam. > -- > Mohamed Iguernlala. > Senior R&D Engineer, OCamlPro SAS > Research Associate, VALS team, LRI > > Le 09/03/2016 11:07, Francois Berenger a écrit : >> On 03/09/2016 10:50 AM, 刘坚 wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I’m recently writing a formal verification tool in OCaml, and >>> it works really well, but I’m considering writing a concurrent version. >>> However, until now, there seems to be no way to write programs that take >>> advantage of multi-cores. >> >> To accelerate something, probably you want paralellism, not concurrency. >> >> I recomend parmap, but there are some other libraries out there >> too for that purpose (in opam: forkwork and probably others I don't >> know). >> >> But be careful that too fine granularity calculations don't >> parallelize well. >> For example, if you are analyzing source code, maybe analyzing >> distinct files in parallel would be a coarse enough granularity. >> >> > So, I’m wondering when will OCaml support >>> multi-core programming? Or else, do I have other choices by using some >>> external extensions of OCaml instead of the standard library? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Jian >> > > -- Regards, Francois. "When in doubt, use more types" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] muti-core programming 2016-03-09 11:04 ` Francois Berenger @ 2016-03-09 21:58 ` Yaron Minsky 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Yaron Minsky @ 2016-03-09 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Francois Berenger; +Cc: caml-list [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1972 bytes --] rpc_parallel might also be of use. On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:04 AM, Francois Berenger < francois.berenger@inria.fr> wrote: > On 03/09/2016 11:23 AM, Mohamed Iguernlala wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Functory may be suitable as well >> (http://opam.ocaml.org/packages/functory/functory.0.5/) >> > > and maybe lwt-parallel by Ivan Gotovchits or > procord by Cryptosense; all available libraries in opam. > > > -- >> Mohamed Iguernlala. >> Senior R&D Engineer, OCamlPro SAS >> Research Associate, VALS team, LRI >> >> Le 09/03/2016 11:07, Francois Berenger a écrit : >> >>> On 03/09/2016 10:50 AM, 刘坚 wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I’m recently writing a formal verification tool in OCaml, and >>>> it works really well, but I’m considering writing a concurrent version. >>>> However, until now, there seems to be no way to write programs that take >>>> advantage of multi-cores. >>>> >>> >>> To accelerate something, probably you want paralellism, not concurrency. >>> >>> I recomend parmap, but there are some other libraries out there >>> too for that purpose (in opam: forkwork and probably others I don't >>> know). >>> >>> But be careful that too fine granularity calculations don't >>> parallelize well. >>> For example, if you are analyzing source code, maybe analyzing >>> distinct files in parallel would be a coarse enough granularity. >>> >>> > So, I’m wondering when will OCaml support >>> >>>> multi-core programming? Or else, do I have other choices by using some >>>> external extensions of OCaml instead of the standard library? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Jian >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- > Regards, > Francois. > "When in doubt, use more types" > > -- > Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list > Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3422 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-03-09 21:58 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-03-09 9:50 [Caml-list] muti-core programming 刘坚 2016-03-09 10:07 ` Francois Berenger 2016-03-09 10:23 ` Mohamed Iguernlala 2016-03-09 11:04 ` Francois Berenger 2016-03-09 21:58 ` Yaron Minsky
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).