by Rastislav Bodík, Justin Bonnar (University of California Berkeley, USA) and Doug Kimelman (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, USA)
Summary of review comments:
The authors argue that programming abstractions that have lead to programmer productivity are not necessarily energy efficient. So in the context of energy constrained computing devices (i.e., when battery life is short), there must be a better way of implementing the intended computation. They outline areas of focus that they are pursuing, which can be explained as (static) specialization, direct refinement from high-level abstraction, and ML-style static languages.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I liked this talk. It seems to have some synergies with the "bloat" work, although it is only 1 example of the abstraction tax.
ReplyDeleteThis brings to mind Stepanov's abstraction penalty benchmark,
ReplyDeletewhich can be found at:
http://www.stepanovpapers.com/
While at SGI, Stepanov encouraged the compiler team to reduce
the abstraction penalty for the SGI compiler. Optimizations
like scalar replacement of aggregates and, of course, procedure
inlining, played an important role in that work.