what is the name for this kind of pointless, lazy, selective, quoting that willfully misconstrues what's being quoted? the answer to this question is incredibly clear: for the developer that created this tool. if that makes you unhappy enough to malign them then maybe you should just not use it?

> Google Gemini already uses their own TPU chips

Google has been using TPUs in prod for like a decade.

No it doesn't

> sequitur noun : the conclusion of an inference : consequence

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sequitur

> "malapropism" is a five dollar word

It is of course but I spent my $5 wisely because my use is syntactically and semantically correct.

Ummm why? Breaking changes aren't the end of the world? Deprecate and communicate clearly and people are usually fine with them (if it's meaningful progress instead of churn).

this is called "disinformation"

Lolol literally no one thinks this

i have yet to meet a single tech worker that isn't so

IREE hasn't been at G for >2 years.

You are presuming an existing tile IP - if you're already in possession of such an IP then the place and route is already coarse grained. There are lots of papers on this.

> (like the GPU does)

What exactly does the GPU do? Yes there are tiles but it's up to you to now tile your workload. You understand this is the exact same problem you're bemoaning re place and route - you need to figure out how to shuffle individual bits efficiently through an existing fabric (roughly it's the same thing as routing 32 wires at a time).

> we need for this to happen is for the companies making the FPGAs to open up the board layout file spec

What exactly is this going to do for you if you're placing tiles? Also you can already recover this by exhaustively enumerating all a->b paths (yes people really do this).

To anyone else that thinks they just absolutely are certain of the silver bullet for digital design: download a copy of Vivado and report back what you discover!

This is a very naive take - the very direct translation of what you're saying doesn't happen does in happen in analysis all the time: there are many inequalities which can be "stacked" to prove a bound on something but their factors are too large so you cannot just stack them if you need a fixed bound for your proof to go through. Unsurprisingly this is exactly how actual runtime analysis also works (it's unsurprising because they're both literally math).

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos-release-note...

Which I'm sure you saw in literally yesterday's thread about the exact same thing.