Re: open64 versus gcc

"A.L." <alewando@fala2005.com>
1 Dec 2006 11:52:42 -0500

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[2 earlier articles]
Re: open64 versus gcc touati.sid-pas-de-spam-svp@gmail.com-pasdespam (touati) (2006-11-24)
Re: open64 versus gcc stevenb.gcc@gmail.com (Steven Bosscher) (2006-11-26)
Re: open64 versus gcc Sid-pasdespam.Touati@inria.fr (Sid Touati) (2006-11-27)
Re: open64 versus gcc drizzle76@gmail.com (dz) (2006-11-29)
Re: open64 versus gcc dnovillo@redhat.com (Diego Novillo) (2006-11-29)
Re: open64 versus gcc alewando@fala2005.com (A.L.) (2006-12-01)
Re: open64 versus gcc alewando@fala2005.com (A.L.) (2006-12-01)
Re: open64 versus gcc jthorn@aei.mpg-zebra.de (Jonathan Thornburg -- remove -animal to reply) (2006-12-03)
Re: open64 versus gcc dnovillo@redhat.com (Diego Novillo) (2006-12-03)
Re: open64 versus gcc lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl) (2006-12-03)
Re: open64 versus gcc bmoses-nospam@cits1.stanford.edu (Brooks Moses) (2006-12-03)
Re: open64 versus gcc mwso@earthlink.net (Gary Oblock) (2006-12-03)
Re: open64 versus gcc Sid-Touati@inria.fr (ST) (2006-12-06)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "A.L." <alewando@fala2005.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 1 Dec 2006 11:52:42 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
References: 06-11-09406-11-100 06-11-104 06-11-113 06-11-120 06-11-124 06-12-015
Keywords: arithmetic, GCC
Posted-Date: 01 Dec 2006 11:52:42 EST

On 1 Dec 2006 09:49:03 -0500, "A.L." <alewando@fala2005.com> wrote:


>One of the feature out of the list of "rich features" is that the
>results of numerical computations (such as inverting large matrix or
>solving large set of linear equations) strongly depends on activated
>options, especially optimization level.
>
>If you are a hobbyist, game programmer or GUI programmer, pretty
>likely gcc is good enough. If you do mission critical application,
>intensive number crunching or both, stay away from gcc.
>
>A.L.
>[GCC is fine for systems programming. I've never done serious
>numerical work in it, so you may well be right about that. -John]


Disclaimer: My expiments with gcc and numerical computations ended
in 2003. Maybe since this time something changedIf there is somebody
here who is using the up-to-date version of gcc for large scale,
intensive floating point number crunching, please share the
experience.


A.L.


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.