This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: [OT] GCC vs Intel C++ compiler benchmark - don't forget ia64
- From: "Duraid Madina" <duraid at fl dot net dot au>
- To: <Richard dot Kreckel at Uni-Mainz dot DE>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 00:16:35 +1100
- Subject: RE: [OT] GCC vs Intel C++ compiler benchmark - don't forget ia64
> > On x86, just use the compiler that doesn't ICE on your code. ;-)
>
> Err, could you please elaborate on this cryptic remark?
If GCC builds your code fine, use GCC. If Intel C++ builds your code
fine, use Intel C++. I've got a few different sources (some of which
aren't terribly complex) that build fine on one and kill the other.
>> but as it stands, you're pretty crazy to use GCC for serious
production
>> work on IA-64 hardware.
>
> Duraid, in all fairness: IIRC it was you who made us try our
> symbolic computation code in C++ on some commercial compilers
> (Intel's was one of them).
You did pick up a coding error or two thanks to this effort, right?
(hmm, I have pretty nasty selective memory sometimes ;-)
> You sure remember this was a complete fiasco.
*cough* Yes *cough*
> Maybe our code is just strange, because GCC generates the best code on
> it. ;-)
No comment. Well okay maybe just one - GMP+CLN+GiNaC is one of the most
admirably portable codes I have ever seen, and yet it is inextricably
linked to GCC in ways I could have never even dreamt of, until I had
seen it.
Happy now? ;-)
Duraid