From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16294 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2004 23:20:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16277 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2004 23:20:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail13.ha.ovh.net) (213.186.33.51) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2004 23:20:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 19998 invoked by uid 503); 26 Mar 2004 23:21:17 -0000 Received: from d213-101-192-4.cust.tele2.fr (HELO ?192.168.0.108?) (laurent%guerby.net@213.101.192.4) by ns0.ovh.net with SMTP; 26 Mar 2004 23:21:17 -0000 Subject: Re: GCC beaten by ICC in stupid trig test! From: Laurent GUERBY To: Roger Sayle Cc: Robert Dewar , Bradley Lucier , Toon Moene , Scott Robert Ladd , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1080343224.27851.278.camel@pc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 00:50:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01596.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2004-03-25 at 14:06, Roger Sayle wrote: > But then its a complete > mystery why this so many of the top500 supercomputers are now Intel/AMD > clusters. Economics. Less true nowadays with Apple decision to sell cheap bi G5 systems, but then it's reflected in the TOP500 with a very nice spot for G5. > Whilst I don't deny that there is a tiny population of GCC users whose > results depend upon the specific representation of their floating point > formats People needing this level of precision always use assembly since no compiler will ever suit them, especially on x86 because of the extended mess. Intel Compiler people must have realized this and offer compilers all their users are happy with. Laurent