More of my philosophy about Delphi and Freepascal and more of my thoughts..

[Amine Moulay Ramdane]

Hello,




More of my philosophy about Delphi and Freepascal and more of my thoughts..

I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..


As you have just noticed, i have just talked about my PERT++ and
my JNI wrapper that i have written in Modern Object Pascal
of Delphi and Freepascal compilers, but why do you think i am also programming in Delphi and Freepascal ?

Of course that Delphi and Freepascal compilers support modern Object Pascal, it is not only Pascal, but it is modern Object Pascal, i mean
that modern Object Pascal of for example Delphi and Freepascal support object oriented programming and support Anonymous methods or typed Lambdas , so i think that it is a decent programming language, even if i know that the new C++ 20 supports generic Lambdas and templated Lambdas, but i think that Delphi will soon also support generic Lambdas, and in Delphi and Freepascal compilers there is no big runtime like in C# and such compilers, so you get small native executables in Delphi
and Freepascal, and inline assembler is supported by both Delphi
and Freepascal, and Lazarus the IDE of Freepascal and Delphi come
both with one of the best GUI tools, and of course you can make .SO, .DLL, executables, etc. in both Delphi and Freepascal, and both Delphi
and Freepascal compilers are Cross platform to Windows, Linux and Mac
and Android etc. , and i think that modern Object Pascal of Delphi
or Freepascal is more strongly typed than C++ , but less strongly typed than ADA programming language, but i think that modern Object Pascal of Delphi and Freepascal are not Strict as the programming language ADA and are not strict as the programming language Rust or the pure functional programming languages, so it can also be flexible and advantageous to not be this kind of strictness, and the compilation times of Delphi is extremely fast , and of course Freepascal supports the Delphi mode so that to be compatible with Delphi and i can go on and on, and it is why i am also programming in Delphi and Freepascal.

And you can read about the last version 11.2 of Delphi from here:

https://www.embarcadero.com/products/delphi

And you can read about Freepascal and Lazarus from here:

https://www.freepascal.org/

https://www.lazarus-ide.org/


More of my philosophy about Asynchronous programming and about the futures and about the ActiveObject and about technology and more of my thoughts..

I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored "above" 115 IQ, i think from my new implementation of
future below, you can notice that Asynchronous programming is not a simple task, since it can get too much complicated , since you can
notice in my implementation below that if i make the starting of the thread of the future out of the constructor and if i make the passing of the parameter as a pointer to the future out of the constructor , it
will get more complex to get the automaton of how to use
and call the methods right and safe, so i think that there is
still a problem with Asynchronous programming and it is that
when you have many Asynchronous tasks or threads it can get
really complex, and i think that it is the weakness of Asynchronous programming, and of course i am also speaking of the implementation
of a sophisticated ActiveObject or a future or complex Asynchronous programming.


More of my philosophy about my new updated implementation of a future and about the ActiveObject and about technology and more of my thoughts..


I think i am highly smart since I have passed two certified IQ tests and i have scored "above" 115 IQ, so i have just updated my implementation
of a future, and now both the starting the thread of the future and the passing the parameter as a pointer to the future is made from the constructor so that to make safe the system of the automaton of the how to use and call the methods, and I have just added support for exceptions, so you have to know that programming with futures is asynchronous programming, but so that to be robust the future implementation has to deal correctly with "exceptions", so in my implementation of a future when an exception is raised inside the future you will receive the exception, so i have implemented two things: The HasException() method so that to detect the exception from inside the future, and the the exception and its address is returned as a string in the ExceptionStr property, and my implementation of a future does of course support passing parameters as a pointer to the future, also my implementation of a future works in Windows and Linux, and of course you can also use my following more sophisticated Threadpool engine with priorities as a sophisticated ActiveObject or such and pass the methods or functions and there parameters to it, here it is:

Threadpool engine with priorities

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/threadpool-engine-with-priorities

And stay tuned since i will enhance more my above Threadpool engine with priorities.

So you can download my new updated portable and efficient implementation of a future in Delphi and FreePascal version 1.32 from my website here:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/a-portable-and-efficient-implementation-of-a-future-in-delphi-and-freepascal


And here is a new example program of how to use my implementation of a future in Delphi and Freepascal and notice that the interface has changed a little bit:


--

program TestFuture;

uses system.SysUtils, system.Classes, Futures;

type

TTestFuture1 = class(TFuture)
public
function Compute(ptr:pointer): Variant; override;
end;

TTestFuture2 = class(TFuture)
public
function Compute(ptr:pointer): Variant; override;
end;

var obj1:TTestFuture1;
obj2:TTestFuture2;
a:variant;


function TTestFuture1.Compute(ptr:pointer): Variant;
begin

raise Exception.Create('I raised an exception');

end;

function TTestFuture2.Compute(ptr:pointer): Variant;
begin

writeln(nativeint(ptr));
result:='Hello world !';

end;


begin

writeln;

obj1:=TTestFuture1.create(pointer(12));

if obj1.GetValue(a) then writeln(a)
else if obj1.HasException then writeln(obj1.ExceptionStr);

obj1.free;

writeln;

obj2:=TTestFuture2.create(pointer(12));


if obj2.GetValue(a) then writeln(a);

obj2.free;

end.

---


More of my philosophy about the 12 memory channels of
the new AMD Epyc Genoa CPU and more of my thoughts..

I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..


So as i am saying below, i think that so that to use 12 memory
channels in parallel that supports it the new AMD Genoa CPU, the GMI-Wide mode must enlarge more and connects each CCD with more GMI links, so i think that it is what is doing AMD in its new 4 CCDs configuration, even with the costs optimized Epyc Genoa 9124 16 cores with 64 MB of L3 cache with 4 Core Complex Dies (CCDs), that costs around $1000 (Look at it here: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-4th-gen-epyc-genoa-9654-9554-and-9374f-review-96-cores-zen-4-and-5nm-disrupt-the-data-center ), and as i am explaining more below that the Core Complex Dies (CCDs) connect to memory, I/O, and each other through the I/O Die (IOD) and each CCD connects to the IOD via a dedicated high-speed, or Global Memory Interconnect (GMI) link and the IOD also contains memory channels, PCIe Gen5 lanes, and Infinity Fabric links and all dies, or chiplets, interconnect with each other via AMD’s Infinity Fabric Technology, and of course this will permit my new software project of Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library that scales very well to scale on the 12 memory channels, read my following thoughts so that to understand more about it:

More of my philosophy about the new Zen 4 AMD Ryzen™ 9 7950X and more of my thoughts..


So i have just looked at the new Zen 4 AMD Ryzen™ 9 7950X CPU, and i invite you to look at it here:

https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-9-7950x

But notice carefully that the problem is with the number of supported memory channels, since it just support two memory channels, so it is not good, since for example my following Open source software project of Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library that scales very well is scaling around 8X on my 16 cores Intel Xeon with 2 NUMA nodes and with 8 memory channels, but it will not scale correctly on the
new Zen 4 AMD Ryzen™ 9 7950X CPU with just 2 memory channels since it is also memory-bound, and here is my Powerful Open source software project of Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library that scales very well and i invite you to take carefully a look at it:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-parallel-c-conjugate-gradient-linear-system-solver-library

So i advice you to buy an AMD Epyc CPU or an Intel Xeon CPU that supports 8 memory channels.

---


And of course you can use the next Twelve DDR5 Memory Channels for Zen 4 AMD EPYC CPUs so that to scale more my above algorithm, and read about it here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-confirms-12-ddr5-memory-channels-on-genoa


And here is the simulation program that uses the probabilistic mechanism that i have talked about and that prove to you that my algorithm of my Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient Linear System Solver Library is scalable:

If you look at my scalable parallel algorithm, it is dividing the each array of the matrix by 250 elements, and if you look carefully i am using two functions that consumes the greater part of all the CPU, it is the atsub() and asub(), and inside those functions i am using a probabilistic mechanism so that to render my algorithm scalable on NUMA architecture , and it also make it scale on the memory channels, what i am doing is scrambling the array parts using a probabilistic function and what i have noticed that this probabilistic mechanism is very efficient, to prove to you what i am saying , please look at the following simulation that i have done using a variable that contains the number of NUMA nodes, and what i have noticed that my simulation is giving almost a perfect scalability on NUMA architecture, for example let us give to the "NUMA_nodes" variable a value of 4, and to our array a value of 250, the simulation bellow will give a number of contention points of a quarter of the array, so if i am using 16 cores , in the worst case it will scale 4X throughput on NUMA architecture, because since i am using an array of 250 and there is a quarter of the array of contention points , so from the Amdahl's law this will give a scalability of almost 4X throughput on four NUMA nodes, and this will give almost a perfect scalability on more and more NUMA nodes, so my parallel algorithm is scalable on NUMA architecture and it also scale well on the memory channels,

Here is the simulation that i have done, please run it and you will notice yourself that my parallel algorithm is scalable on NUMA architecture.

Here it is:

---
program test;

uses math;

var tab,tab1,tab2,tab3:array of integer;
a,n1,k,i,n2,tmp,j,numa_nodes:integer;
begin

a:=250;
Numa_nodes:=4;

setlength(tab2,a);

for i:=0 to a-1
do
begin

tab2:=i mod numa_nodes;

end;

setlength(tab,a);

randomize;

for k:=0 to a-1
do tab:=k;

n2:=a-1;

for k:=0 to a-1
do
begin
n1:=random(n2);
tmp:=tab;
tab:=tab[n1];
tab[n1]:=tmp;
end;

setlength(tab1,a);

randomize;

for k:=0 to a-1
do tab1:=k;

n2:=a-1;

for k:=0 to a-1
do
begin
n1:=random(n2);
tmp:=tab1;
tab1:=tab1[n1];
tab1[n1]:=tmp;
end;

for i:=0 to a-1
do
if tab2[tab]=tab2[tab1] then
begin
inc(j);
writeln('A contention at: ',i);

end;

writeln('Number of contention points: ',j);
setlength(tab,0);
setlength(tab1,0);
setlength(tab2,0);
end.
---


More of my philosophy about 4 CCDs configuration of AMD Epyc Genoa CPU and more of my thoughts..


I have just read the following new paper about AMD 4th Gen EPYC 9004 Series, so i invite you to read it carefully:

https://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-genoa-data-center-cpu-launch


So read carefully the 4 CCDs configuration, so i am understanding
the following from it:


I/O DIE is what is connected to the memory channels externally, and it says that SKUs north of 4 CCDs (e.g. 32 cores) use the GMI3-Narrow configuration with a single GMI link per CCD. With 4 CCD and lower SKUs, AMD can implement GMI-Wide mode which joins each CCD to the IOD with two GMI links. In this case, one link of each CCD populates GMI0 to GMI3 while the other link of each CCD populates GMI8 to GMI11 as diagramed above. This helps these parts better balance against I/O demands.

So i think that that AMD implemented in his new 4 CCDs configuration the GMI-Wide mode which joins each CCD to the IOD with two GMI links, so that to be connected to the 8 memory channels externally and use them in parallel, so i think that the problem is solved, since i think that the cost optimized Epyc Genoa 9124 16 cores with 64 MB of L3 cache with 4 Core Complex Dies (CCDs), that costs around $1000 (Look at it here: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-4th-gen-epyc-genoa-9654-9554-and-9374f-review-96-cores-zen-4-and-5nm-disrupt-the-data-center )
can use fully the 8 memory channels in parallel, so it is a good Epyc Genoa processor to buy.

And of course i invite you to read the following:

More of my philosophy about the new Epyc Genoa and about Core Complex Die (CCD) and Core-complex(CCX) and more of my thoughts..

I have just looked at the following paper from AMD and i invite
you to look at it:

https://developer.amd.com/wp-content/resources/56827-1-0.pdf

And as you notice above that you have to look at how many
Core Complex Dies (CCDs) you have, since it tells you more
about how many connections of Infinity Fabric you have, and it is
an important information, since look at the following article
about the new AMD Epyc Genoa:

https://wccftech.com/amd-epyc-genoa-cpu-lineup-specs-benchmarks-leak-up-to-2-6x-faster-than-intel-xeon/


And you can read much more of my thoughts about technology in the following web links:


https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/MosH5fY4g_Y

And here:

https://groups.google.com/g/soc.culture.usa/c/N_UxX3OECX4






Hello,




More of my philosophy about my PERT++ and about my JNI Wrapper for Delphi and FreePascal and about the new Java SE Development Kit 19.0.1 and more of my thoughts..

I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

I have just downloaded and installed the new Java SE Development Kit 19.0.1

Here it is:

https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/jdk19-archive-downloads.html


And i have just tested my open source JNI Wrapper for Delphi and FreePascal with the Java SE Development Kit 19.0.1, and it i working perfectly, so you can download my JNI Wrapper for Delphi and FreePascal from my website here:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/jni-wrapper-for-delphi-and-freepascal


And I have also tested my other open source software project called PERT++ with the new Java SE Development Kit 19.0.1, and it is working perfectly, so you can download my PERT++ from my website here:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/pert-an-enhanced-edition-of-the-program-or-project-evaluation-and-review-technique-that-includes-statistical-pert-in-delphi-and-freepascal

And I have in my PERT++ provided you with two ways of how to estimate the critical path, first, by the way of CPM(Critical Path Method) that shows all the arcs of the estimate of the critical path, and the second way is by the way of the central limit theorem by using the inverse normal distribution function, and you have to provide my software project that is called PERT++ with three types of estimates that are the following:

Optimistic time - generally the shortest time in which the activity
can be completed. It is common practice to specify optimistic times
to be three standard deviations from the mean so that there is
approximately a 1% chance that the activity will be completed within
the optimistic time.

Most likely time - the completion time having the highest
probability. Note that this time is different from the expected time.

Pessimistic time - the longest time that an activity might require. Three standard deviations from the mean is commonly used for the pessimistic time.

The central limit theorem states that the sampling distribution of the mean of any independent, random variable will be normal or nearly normal, if the sample size is large enough.

How large is "large enough"?

In practice, some statisticians say that a sample size of 30 is large enough when the population distribution is roughly bell-shaped. Others recommend a sample size of at least 40. But if the original population is distinctly not normal (e.g., is badly skewed, has multiple peaks, and/or has outliers), researchers like the sample size to be even larger. So i invite you to read my following thoughts about my software
project that is called PERT++, and notice that the PERT networks are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic activity networks" (PAN) because the duration of some or all of the arcs are independent random variables with known probability distribution functions, and have finite ranges. So PERT uses the central limit theorem (CLT) to find the expected project duration.

So I have provided you in my PERT++ with the following functions:


function NormalDistA (const Mean, StdDev, AVal, BVal: Extended): Single;

function NormalDistP (const Mean, StdDev, AVal: Extended): Single;

function InvNormalDist(const Mean, StdDev, PVal: Extended; const Less: Boolean): Extended;

For NormalDistA() or NormalDistP(), you pass the best estimate of completion time to Mean, and you pass the critical path standard deviation to StdDev, and you will get the probability of the value Aval or the probability between the values of Aval and Bval.

For InvNormalDist(), you pass the best estimate of completion time to Mean, and you pass the critical path standard deviation to StdDev, and you will get the length of the critical path of the probability PVal, and when Less is TRUE, you will obtain a cumulative distribution.

So as you are noticing from my above thoughts that since PERT networks are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic activity networks" (PAN) because the duration of some or all of the arcs are independent random variables with known probability distribution functions, and have finite ranges. So PERT uses the central limit theorem (CLT) to find the expected project duration. So then you have to use my above functions
that are Normal distribution and inverse normal distribution functions, please look at my demo inside my zip file to understand better how i am doing it:

You can download and read about my PERT++ from my website here:

https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/pert-an-enhanced-edition-of-the-program-or-project-evaluation-and-review-technique-that-includes-statistical-pert-in-delphi-and-freepascal



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.