[almostgotcaught]

They require one person or team to engineer and then a whole bunch of people to use...? That doesn't resemble in the least what you were describing where each kernel is hand-tuned for each shape and device. But please do continue to insist you're still somehow right

[anon291]

Sigh. I use to be an engineering manager for a kernels team. I think I know what I'm talking about. Yes, each kernel is paid individual attention to even if many are basically the same and require little rework. It's a lot of work. Now I work as an ic in the same field . I don't need to insist I'm right because it's what I do all day

[almostgotcaught]

> I think I know what I'm talking about

I've refuted your claims point by point and all you can say is "trust me bro"? Cool but I think you do not in fact know what you're talking about.

[lumost]

I work in DB kernels, everything gets hand tuned as there is economic reason for hand tuning it. The expectation in many of these systems is that there are no wasted cycles. You can codegen a decent kernel, but then someone will find a better approach - do you want the slower version of the product, or the faster one?

You can see this in action with matrix math libraries, folks have been hand tuning those for decades at this point.

[anon291]

Your claim is that there are automated methods (which I mentioned in my original post) to manage the complexity. My claim is that it requires a large team of engineers working on it. I'm not really sure what you think you've refuted.