Re: FWD: FLOATING-POINT CONSISTENCY, -FFLOAT-STORE, AND X86

[Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>]

Toon> However, what I'm challenging is that we should burden
 Toon> the compiler with these considerations *by default* 

> Indeed.

> I haven't followed all this, but am somewhat bemused 
> by it.

I must say that I am *not* amused.  This discussion goes into a
direction that will leave us with a compiler that, although
numerical-politically correct, will be generating such slow code as to
be totally unuseable.

> There are frequent complaints about Fortran due to the > x86 register business.  All the ones I've checked have > been covered by the advice in the g77 manual to link
> code frobbing the control word (which allows us to
> pass paranoia).  Anyone know of exceptions?

Exactly.  That's the test we should be aiming for - not something
someone comes up with who hasn't taken the time to read the relevant
(numerical analysis) texts.

Sorry to be so harsh, but I'm trying to save a compiler here.

To put it all in a one-liner:

The compiler can't - and won't - save you from doing a numerical
analysis class.

-- 
Toon Moene (toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl)
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Phone: +31 346 214290; Fax: +31 346 214286
g77 Support: fortran@gnu.org; egcs: egcs-bugs@cygnus.com