Some complaints about SPEC and a request for FORTRAN validation codes

Mayan Moudgill <moudgill@cs.cornell.EDU>
Sat, 6 Mar 1993 06:42:35 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Some complaints about SPEC and a request for FORTRAN validation codes moudgill@cs.cornell.EDU (Mayan Moudgill) (1993-03-06)
Re: complaints about SPEC and a request for FORTRAN validation codes jwreilly@mipos2.intel.com (1993-03-11)
Re: complaints about SPEC and a request for FORTRAN validation codes mash@mash.wpd.sgi.com (1993-03-11)
Re: complaints about SPEC and a request for FORTRAN validation codes grover@brahmand.Eng.Sun.COM (1993-03-12)
What do benchmarks measure? (WAS: complaints about SPEC ...) pardo@cs.washington.edu (1993-03-14)
Re: complaints about SPEC and a request for FORTRAN validation codes jwreilly@mipos2.intel.com (1993-03-15)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks,comp.compilers
From: Mayan Moudgill <moudgill@cs.cornell.EDU>
Keywords: benchmarks, Fortran, question
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1993 06:42:35 GMT

First, a caveat: I've only used the earlier version of SPEC, so I'm not
sure my comments apply to CFP92.


_BUT_


Are the FORTRAN programs in SPEC supposed to be Fortran77 compliant? Or
anything compliant? And if they aren't could they at least document the
discrepancies between the actual programs and ANSI X 3.9-1978? And the
assumptions made about I/O? Why, oh why, do they use 5 and 6 for input and
output instead of *?


As you've probably guessed, I'm trying to get the benchmarks to run
through a ``new'' compiler. Does someone have a smaller :) suite of
validation programs available?


:)
Mayan
--

Post a followup to this message

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