From: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
To: Roger Sayle <roger@eyesopen.com>
Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com>,
Bradley Lucier <lucier@math.purdue.edu>,
Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl>,
Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC beaten by ICC in stupid trig test!
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 16:36:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200403251502.i2PF2aT35078@makai.watson.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Message from Roger Sayle <roger@eyesopen.com> of "Thu, 25 Mar 2004 06:06:01 MST." <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403250430380.28065-100000@www.eyesopen.com>
>>>>> Roger Sayle writes:
Roger> So my next experiment was to search the internet to see if anyone had
Roger> ever complained about the floating point accuracy of Intel's icc
Roger> compilers. After an hour or two, I was unable to find a single report;
Roger> SPECcpu2000's fp self-tests all pass, POV-ray images are bit for bit
Roger> identical, etc...
What about the more general question of what type of customer uses
ICC versus other compilers? Are numericists using ICC? Is GCC implicitly
changing strategy with this proposal?
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-25 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-24 19:04 Bradley Lucier
2004-03-24 19:29 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-24 19:43 ` Bradley Lucier
2004-03-24 19:50 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-24 23:48 ` Toon Moene
2004-03-25 0:02 ` Toon Moene
2004-03-25 0:11 ` Roger Sayle
2004-03-25 5:56 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-25 6:07 ` Bradley Lucier
2004-03-25 8:18 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-25 16:15 ` Roger Sayle
2004-03-25 16:36 ` David Edelsohn [this message]
2004-03-25 17:09 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-25 17:47 ` David Edelsohn
2004-03-25 18:03 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-26 1:29 ` Toon Moene
2004-03-27 0:23 ` Daniel Egger
2004-03-27 0:50 ` Laurent GUERBY
2004-03-27 0:55 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-27 0:58 ` Laurent GUERBY
2004-03-27 1:16 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-25 5:36 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-25 8:46 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-25 5:34 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-25 7:24 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-25 8:28 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-25 18:19 ` Per Abrahamsen
2004-03-24 20:14 ` Paul Koning
2004-03-24 21:00 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-24 22:20 ` Dale Johannesen
2004-03-24 21:07 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-03-24 21:38 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-24 21:44 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-24 22:49 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-03-24 22:19 ` Richard Guenther
2004-03-24 22:21 ` Dale Johannesen
2004-03-25 7:29 ` Robert Dewar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-03-25 16:51 Wolfgang Bangerth
2004-03-15 16:06 Robert Dewar
2004-03-16 8:45 ` Per Abrahamsen
2004-03-17 0:09 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-17 0:36 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-17 5:53 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-17 7:21 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-17 9:10 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-21 16:55 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-23 19:38 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-23 19:58 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-23 20:49 ` Laurent GUERBY
2004-03-24 8:17 ` Toon Moene
2004-03-24 13:50 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-24 18:25 ` Paul Koning
2004-03-24 18:51 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-25 18:18 ` Per Abrahamsen
2004-03-27 1:26 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-24 18:56 ` Joe Buck
2004-03-24 19:10 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-24 19:14 ` Richard Guenther
2004-03-24 19:39 ` Paul Brook
2004-03-24 19:45 ` Dave Korn
2004-03-24 20:57 ` Paul Brook
2004-03-25 6:14 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-25 18:32 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-27 1:28 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-17 14:51 ` Per Abrahamsen
2004-03-17 15:18 ` Gabriel Dos Reis
2004-03-17 16:05 ` Per Abrahamsen
2004-03-16 12:14 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-17 0:19 ` Robert Dewar
2004-03-14 23:40 GCC viciously beaten by ICC in " Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 0:12 ` GCC beaten by ICC in stupid " Andrew Pinski
2004-03-15 0:32 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 1:31 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 2:36 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-03-15 11:25 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 11:31 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 13:29 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 13:42 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 13:51 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 13:55 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 14:00 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 14:05 ` Joseph S. Myers
2004-03-15 14:13 ` Paolo Carlini
2004-03-15 14:18 ` Zdenek Dvorak
2004-03-15 14:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2004-03-15 14:28 ` Joseph S. Myers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200403251502.i2PF2aT35078@makai.watson.ibm.com \
--to=dje@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=coyote@coyotegulch.com \
--cc=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=lucier@math.purdue.edu \
--cc=roger@eyesopen.com \
--cc=toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).