On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:56 AM, Luis Cabellos
Hello, all. I want to show you the OpenCL package. I have done this using Jeff Heard OpenCLRaw package, but I create a new one due the lack of updates of the former. # Where to get it * Hackage page (http://hackage.haskell.org/package/OpenCL) * Repository (https://github.com/zhensydow/opencl) * Bugs (https://github.com/zhensydow/opencl/issues) * Examples (https://github.com/zhensydow/opencl/tree/master/examples). # Things: * I write it's high-level binding to OpenCL libraries, but only because I added more types to hide most of the alloc/free of the API, and hide the enums using c2hs enums. * The worst problem of the OpenCLRaw is the bad types it use, I learn to fix 32/64 bits issues with c2hs, and test it on linux machines. * Tested on Linux + NVidia only. * Jason Dagit is helping with Windows, OSX testing in own fork, also the call-conv fork in github has changes to work on Windows
Your bindings are a higher quality than the the OpenCLRaw bindings and you're doing good technical work, but I stopped using your bindings for a couple reasons: * The main reason is that I'm not comfortable with the license you're using. The original code by Jeff Heard was BSD3 with an additional copyright notice. Your code is AGPL3. The GPL is known to cause problems with Haskell code due to cross module inlining. I don't know how the "A" in AGPL changes things. * Some of the exposed function names have been changed from the original name in the OpenCL specification. This is the same thing that was done with the OpenGL bindings and it is very confusing for people who come to the Haskell bindings from the official documentation. I realize that some of the API functions require some bit of name mangling, but I think the current way is not the right way. For example with this function: http://www.khronos.org/registry/cl/sdk/1.0/docs/man/xhtml/clGetDeviceInfo.ht... We could have a different version of the function for each return type, clGetDeviceInfo_FPConfig, clGetDeviceInfo_AddressBits, etc. It's a great naming convention but it has the property that someone searching the bindings or the bindings' haddocks for clGetDeviceInfo will find those functions. I think this is better than naming it clGetDeviceExtensions, which is not in the OpenCL specification. I'd still be willing to test the changes you have, I just don't want to contribute to your bindings due to the license. I currently thinking of starting my own bindings (Jeff's bindings contain too many small bugs and if I'm going to change most lines of code then I might as well start from scratch so that it can have a standard BSD3 license). Jason