Charlie Burnes (charlie.burnes.delete@this.no-spam.com) on May 17, 2022 3:22 pm wrote:
> > Make the error message (when there is neither hardware, nor software emulation) obvious.
> > "Call Intel for help. This is their problem. Get your money back. Chose a better CPU."
>
> I thought you were being serious until I read the last two lines.

I wrote it in the context of "If you are writing software that you want to work on a lot
of different systems 10 years from now [...]".

In that context, AVX512 should be table stakes, software should target it, and a failure
to implement it in hardware or provide slow-but-functional emulation should solely rest
on the shoulders of that party, not the whole market. "Your Atom core has no AVX512? And
Intel doesn't provide software emulation? Call Intel... [see above]".

So yeah... forward-looking, not backward-looking, in a sense.

> I agree that Intel made a horrible mess of their instruction set extensions.

Vote with your wallet.

> Intel forced the people who develop on x86 to be responsible for cleaning up the mess.

Vote with your software. In the forward-looking context, that hard error message is fine.

Stop coddling Intel. :)