This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC beaten by ICC in stupid trig test!
- From: David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>
- To: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>
- Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>, Bradley Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>, Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 10:02:36 -0500
- Subject: Re: GCC beaten by ICC in stupid trig test!
- References: <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