From what I can see, your comment does not disapprove the main points of the article... Which are that OpenCL development moved very slowly (design by committee always do) and that vendors did not contribute with all their cards at the table.

While you may have adopted OpenCL for a long time, Chris Lattner created it (with his team, of course), I wouldn't dismiss his account of the early history offhand.

Thanks so much for explaining this. I was just about to comment "Isn't Vulkan the main OpenCL and CUDA alternative these days?" could you share a bit more on what Vulkan is missing relative to the other two?

This is a fantastic overview. I learned a lot, thanks!

As someone whose only experience with GPU programming (except very high-level stuff via Torch) has been OpenCL, I gotta say I found it really pleasant! I've always wondered why it didn't take off, and hate the current situation.

I looked with hope at Vulkan, but am saddened by what you write about it. Could you elaborate on what the state of Vulkan Compute is, and where it might go from here?