DCompute is now in the master branch of LDC

[Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Dne 31.5.2017 v 12:01 Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce napsal(a):
> On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 09:07:16 ParticlePeter via Digitalmars-d-announce
> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 18:06:56 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> On 5/30/2017 5:12 AM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
>>>> Ah, isn't English wonderful. I guess Walter is suffering the
>>>> inverse of the Calvin & Hobbes "Verbing nouns weirds the
>>>> language", nouning verbs does weird the language, but only to
>>>> those who aren't used to that particular nouning of the verb.
>>> Just to clarify, I find that "Compute" is not evocative of
>>> "GPU". I read "CUDA by Example" a couple years ago, and even
>>> downloaded the CUDA SDK and compiled/ran a simple program on a
>>> graphics card. But I never noticed that "Compute" had anything
>>> specific to do with GPU programming.
>>>
>>> I fear the conversation will go like this, like it has for me:
>>>   N: DCompute
>>>   W: What's DCompute?
>>>   N: Enables GPU programming with D
>>>   W: Cool!
>>>
>>> instead of:
>>>   N: D-GPU
>>>   W: Cool! I can use D to program GPUs!
>>>
>>> The problem with the first conversation is W may just move on
>>> to the next topic rather than investigate what DCompute is.
>> D-GPU is very misleading to people who use the GPU for its
>> original purpose, which is graphics programming. One could assume
>> D-GPU being an alternative to Vulkan, OpenGL, DirectX.
>>
>> The term 'compute' is well established with the community of
>> people using the gpu for, well, compute purpose. You need to ask
>> your self if you want to attract people who understand that term
>> and are willing to use or try it with D, or if you want to inform
>> a broader spectrum of people that 'D' can now do some (whatever)
>> stuff on the 'GPU'.
>>
>> So +1 for DCompute, but if you insist you should definitely
>> narrow it down to D-GPGPU.
> Something like d-compute-gpu or d-gpu-compute maybe?
>
> I don't know. Maybe dcompute is fine, but it's clear that for a number of
> folks, it's a pretty meaningless name. On the other hand, I don't know how
> many of such folks would even be interestend in using it.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis
>
Why not just gpu-compute or GPUcompute