Opencl gives you the subset of capability that a lot of different companies were confident they could implement. That subset turns out to be intensely annoying to program in - it's just the compiler saying no over and over again.
Or you can compile as freestanding c++ with clang extensions and it works much like a CPU does. Or you can compile as cuda or openmp and most stuff you write actually turns into code, not a semantic error.
Currently cuda holds lead position but it should lose that place because it's horrible to work in (and to a lesser extent because more than one company knows how to make a GPU). Openmp is an interesting alternative - need to be a little careful to get fast code out but lots of things work somewhat intuitively.
Personally, I think raw C++ is going to win out and the many heterogeneous languages will ultimately be dropped as basically a bad idea. But time will tell. Opencl looks very DoA.
Or you can compile as freestanding c++ with clang extensions and it works much like a CPU does. Or you can compile as cuda or openmp and most stuff you write actually turns into code, not a semantic error.
Currently cuda holds lead position but it should lose that place because it's horrible to work in (and to a lesser extent because more than one company knows how to make a GPU). Openmp is an interesting alternative - need to be a little careful to get fast code out but lots of things work somewhat intuitively.
Personally, I think raw C++ is going to win out and the many heterogeneous languages will ultimately be dropped as basically a bad idea. But time will tell. Opencl looks very DoA.