> Am I correct in assuming that you can still (easily) obtain, inspect and profile the Futhark-generated OpenCL code using the usual tools? I suppose a sensible workflow could be using Futhark to get as far as you can and then hand optimize the bottleneck kernels further.
Sort of. Futhark generates pretty simple OpenCL host code, but there is not yet an obvious way to tie the generated kernels back to the original Futhark source code. As a result, it's easy enough to detect that some specific kernel is the bottleneck, and often also why, but it can be a bit of a puzzle to connect it to a part of the original program. While you can in principle edit the generated kernels yourself, it's not code that is at all nice to read or modify.
> Do you happen to know of any scientific/engineering applications (lattice Boltzmann methods, molecular dynamics, etc.) using Futhark in the wild?
No. Closest are simple things like nbody[0] simulations.
> From a quick glance at the website it seemed like all of the applications are focused on image/video processing, any reason for that?
Not sure. Most of these are stencils, and while Futhark does alright with stencils, it doesn't do anything particularly clever (no hexagonal tiling, for example). Maybe it's just that they are easy and satisfying to write, because you trivially get something visual at the end.
Futhark's design was originally inspired by nasty financial algorithms (the ones from the FinPar suite[1]), which tend to be a combination of Monte Carlo methods and differential equations. I'd say that is Futhark's main strength.
Sort of. Futhark generates pretty simple OpenCL host code, but there is not yet an obvious way to tie the generated kernels back to the original Futhark source code. As a result, it's easy enough to detect that some specific kernel is the bottleneck, and often also why, but it can be a bit of a puzzle to connect it to a part of the original program. While you can in principle edit the generated kernels yourself, it's not code that is at all nice to read or modify.
> Do you happen to know of any scientific/engineering applications (lattice Boltzmann methods, molecular dynamics, etc.) using Futhark in the wild?
No. Closest are simple things like nbody[0] simulations.
[0]: https://github.com/diku-dk/futhark-benchmarks/tree/master/ac...
> From a quick glance at the website it seemed like all of the applications are focused on image/video processing, any reason for that?
Not sure. Most of these are stencils, and while Futhark does alright with stencils, it doesn't do anything particularly clever (no hexagonal tiling, for example). Maybe it's just that they are easy and satisfying to write, because you trivially get something visual at the end.
Futhark's design was originally inspired by nasty financial algorithms (the ones from the FinPar suite[1]), which tend to be a combination of Monte Carlo methods and differential equations. I'd say that is Futhark's main strength.
[1]: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2898354