Once I tried to start a fair discussion... :)

[xhunaudio]

Hi Jules,

any news about the "GUI based editor for soulpatches" Cesare mentioned earlier?

That would be a real "killer application" for SOUL (and a boost for its diffusion).

[jules]

Well the news is that our plan is to work on one this year, but it's a huge project, so don't expect it to appear overnight!

[xhunaudio]

Thank you Jules, I can wait...

[xhunaudio]

It seems the SOUL license details have been finally published :

LICENSE :
https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL/blob/ ... LICENSE.md

SOUL-EULA :
https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL/blob/ ... UL-EULA.md

SOUL-PRIVACY-POLICY :
https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL/blob/ ... -POLICY.md

I'm not sure about how specifically a SOUL plugins/patches development translates in practice...

[BertKoor]

Well, this part from the EULA should explain that:

1.3. You may sell or distribute Applications using the Software that incorporates your Licensee Content to end users, provided that you adhere to the terms in this Agreement.

No surprise there...

[jules]

It seems the SOUL license details have been finally published :

LICENSE :
https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL/blob/ ... LICENSE.md

SOUL-EULA :
https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL/blob/ ... UL-EULA.md

SOUL-PRIVACY-POLICY :
https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL/blob/ ... -POLICY.md

I'm not sure about how specifically a SOUL plugins/patches development translates in practice...

Erm.. we published all this about 2 years ago.

I did rejig the readme file yesterday because I had a couple of people complain that it was confusing. But I didn't add, remove or change any of the license terms.

[xhunaudio]

So, it seems I just found the SOUL license details...

Since in the PRIVACY there's a mention to :

"information that you provide when purchasing a SOUL license",

I belive it is something related exclusively to drivers and/or hardware developers only, not SOUL plugins devs... ?

I'm very glad to see SOUL development and popularity are having a boost (I just read all the topics @ the Juce Forum, several interesting 3rd party initiatives seem to be taking off).

I would also ask if you are planning (on the long term) to make a full SOUL IDE, being 100% free and independent from JUCE, including a GUI designer "code generator" (for example JS).

Obviously I'm not referring to this intermediate / prototyping / "precompiled C++ hybrid" SOUL stage, but in time for its full, non-precompiled, "JIT" debut (for both DSP and GUI side).

[jules]

"information that you provide when purchasing a SOUL license",

Yeah. Lawyers. <shrug>

We've no plans to charge for anything in the short-term, and probably never to end-user devs.

And yes, we're actively working on some ideas for a proper IDE, hoping to be able to create something really cool.

[jens]

This post from 2019 is priceless:

Despite marketing hypes of the passed years, ARM architecture can't be considered in any way a valid x86-x64 competitor for high-performance computing scenarios ( I'm not talking about the twitter/facebook/web navigation scenarios )

lol

[xhunaudio]

Yes, today the M1 CPU is a good chip, on par (more or less) with x86 counterparts.

1)
(November 2020) - (November 2019) = 12 months have passed. At last, it seems you waited enough to make your LOL, eheh.

2)
You are comparing a 5 (at least) years old x86 architecture with a M1 architecture released 3 months ago. Intel didn't issue any new microarchitecture because it had no contenders in the last 5-10 years. AMD made a giant leap forward with Zen (ands its performance today equals a 5 years old Intel chip, more or less).

3)
It's posititive that the M1 chip is a good processor. This will force Intel to issue new microarchitectures from its R&D. Again, the latest one was issued 5 years ago - or, seriously speaking, 10 years ago (Sandy bridge, the latest "big" improvement).

4)
Eheh, I would not 100% trust what Apple claims in its "tests". Geekbench is definitely NOT a high end benchmarking system. As many other similar softwares, I consider it as a lifestyle benchmark. It would be interesting to see some serious benchmanrks results : Wetstone and Drystone results in different setup arrangements (multi-core, single-core, scalar, vector-128, vector-256, vector-512, ...). Said that, the M1 chip looks interesting. It's a good thing (for the entire Industry) that it has been made.

5)
I'm human and I my analysis may be wrong. I have no problems with this.

Please, if you just want to make a personal attack, just open a new fight thread. Please, leave this SOUL, JIT, etc. discussion fair.

[mystran]

This post from 2019 is priceless:

Despite marketing hypes of the passed years, ARM architecture can't be considered in any way a valid x86-x64 competitor for high-performance computing scenarios ( I'm not talking about the twitter/facebook/web navigation scenarios )

lol

"High-performance Computing" (or HPC) is what you do with super-computers (or practically speaking large clusters of servers) and anyone thinking they are doing HPC in their studio doesn't have a clue what the term really means.

edit: M1 apparently currently has a maximum memory limit of 16GB which makes it pretty much a bad joke when it comes to real HPC.

edit2: Just to clarify, whether or not there are ARM options suitable for HPC, I don't know. But Apple's M1 is not one. It's very clearly designed as a desktop-chip only.

edit3: to answer my own question in second edit: https://www.hpcwire.com/2020/06/29/the- ... ns-on-arm/

[xhunaudio]

I already replied to your "HPC objection" 1 year ago, in this thread...

[jens]

This post from 2019 is priceless:

Despite marketing hypes of the passed years, ARM architecture can't be considered in any way a valid x86-x64 competitor for high-performance computing scenarios ( I'm not talking about the twitter/facebook/web navigation scenarios )

lol

"High-performance Computing" (or HPC) is what you do with super-computers (or practically speaking large clusters of servers) and anyone thinking they are doing HPC in their studio doesn't have a clue what the term really means.

edit: M1 apparently currently has a maximum memory limit of 16GB which makes it pretty much a bad joke when it comes to real HPC.

edit2: Just to clarify, whether or not there are ARM options suitable for HPC, I don't know. But Apple's M1 is not one. It's very clearly designed as a desktop-chip only.

edit3: to answer my own question in second edit: https://www.hpcwire.com/2020/06/29/the- ... ns-on-arm/

Exactly. I didn't even mention the M1.

It is - and was - simply a complete myth that ARM can't compete with X64 in whatever kind of computer-class, which was my point. Apple will soon come out with bigger ARM chips as will the competition. We can expect more from at least Qualcomm and Mediatek. In the long run, the X86/64 days are probably numbered. But at least ARM isn't going to disappear any time soon - quite the contrary.

Hence the *lol* - it certainly wasn't any sort of personal attack. Just amusement in regards to the perpetuation of myths in the face of facts.

[xhunaudio]

M1 *has* to be mentioned simply because is the highest performance ARM today. It doesn't make much sense to mention a Cortex M3 for comparison.

"a complete myth that ARM can't compete with X64 in whatever kind of computer-class" : I never said anything like that.

ARM are valid designs. A CPU ISA itself has literally *nothing* to do with a CPU processing power. In addition, a modern ARM CPU and a modern x86 CPU are based on the same, high-performance "Berkeley RISC derivation" design, so they have a lot in common.

There are no myths in my post, I simply wrote in November 2019 about the ARM CPUs of that time (not a generic consideration about the ARM ISA). The same can be said for modern MIPS "open source" architectures and others.

Intel "loosen the rope" in the passed few years (due to the lack of competition) and never released new architectures (that would have been auto-competition).

On the contrary, ARM continued to issue new arch and focused in low-power efficiency, which is always a good approach on the long term.

But, again, the fact remains : the x86 to beat (today) are based on a (at least) 5 years old architecture.

The arrival of Zen and M1 is something good in general. I think at this point things will be much more interesting.

[jens]

M1 *has* to be mentioned simply because is the highest performance ARM today. It doesn't make much sense to mention a Cortex M3 for comparison.

Nonsense - the A64 is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu_A64FX

"a complete myth that ARM can't compete with X64 in whatever kind of computer-class" : I never said anything like that.

No?

You - literally said that "ARM architecture can't be considered in any way a valid x86-x64 competitor for high-performance computing scenarios". Funny that you seem to have troubles remembering saying that, even though we are discussing that quote of yours as we speak.

But I quoted you once again below so you have further support for your seemingly mal-functioning memory.

There are no myths in my post, I simply wrote in November 2019 about the ARM CPUs of that time (not a generic consideration about the ARM ISA). The same can be said for modern MIPS "open source" architectures and others.

No, you didn't - you specifically talked about Apple's (then future) move to ARM - here's the full paragraph of what you wrote:

Despite marketing hypes of the passed years, ARM architecture can't be considered in any way a valid x86-x64 competitor for high-performance computing scenarios ( I'm not talking about the twitter/facebook/web navigation scenarios ) . If Apple wants to completely move to ARM devices, it's because for that time they expect a big diffusion of software based on the DSA/HC approach (it's long to explain in detail).

You see, you could have just said "okay, in hindsight I was pretty wrong" (which you were - as we all are sometimes) and joined in with the laughter - but instead you had to get all argumentative about it, even though it is an argument you can't "win" - because you were completely wrong, no matter how you look at it.