From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-59534-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 25325 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2002 22:50:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 25318 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2002 22:50:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 2 Sep 2002 22:50:21 -0000
Received: by nile.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 338)
	id A0F86F2D75; Mon,  2 Sep 2002 18:50:20 -0400 (EDT)
To: dewar@gnat.com, tjw@omnigroup.com
Subject: Re: [GCC 3.x] Performance testing for QA
Cc: Peter.Sasi@t-systems.co.hu, aj@suse.de, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Message-Id: <20020902225020.A0F86F2D75@nile.gnat.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2002 15:50:00 -0000
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00044.txt.bz2

<<   (It's also great to have a bunch of scientific code as benchmarks,
but code that Joe Bob might use should make an appearance too).
>>

There is of course the Livermoor Loops benchmark in this area ...