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

[Marc Lehmann <pcg at goof dot com>]

On Sat, Dec 19, 1998 at 05:22:59PM -0500, N8TM@aol.com wrote:
>  I have no idea how valid these results are (I'm probably not measuring the
>  fst), but xfmode spills seem to be expensive.
>   >>
> Thanks for this indication.  That would reinforce my opinion that double
> spills might be preferred where the syntax indicates single (float) precision,
> with xfmode reserved for those cases where the syntax indicates double.  I
> still would wish to be assured of a mechanism to align the spills, unless
> tests could show that is unnecessary.  I have to be skeptical when the
> compiler (lf95) which uses xfmode spills suffers so from mis-alignment of most
> declared double arrays.

I was quite suprosed of it myself. But I only got difefrences for the first
iteration (when the data is not in the cache)

--
Happy New Year, I'll be away from 21. Dec to 7. Jan

      -----==-                                              |
      ----==-- _                                            |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann       +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg@goof.com       |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\                          --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                        |
                                                          |