This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC options and floating-point correctness (benchmarks)
- From: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
- To: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>
- Cc: Theodore Papadopoulo <Theodore dot Papadopoulo at sophia dot inria dot fr>,gcc mailing list <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:24:48 -0800
- Subject: Re: GCC options and floating-point correctness (benchmarks)
- References: <200403251805.i2PI5ung011979@mururoa.inria.fr> <4063269E.8020708@coyotegulch.com>
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 01:36:14PM -0500, Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
> [ paranoia results ]
> Given that GCC exhibits FAILURES and DEFECTS, even under the best of
> circumstances, suggests that ICC may have a leg up when it comes to this
> benchmark.
But there's a problem. People have posted trivial programs where icc
majorly violates IEEE rules. Could Intel be tuning specifically to work
well on paranoia, but take impermissible shortcuts elsewhere?