This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Stepanov results with development gcc
- To: Joe Buck <jbuck at racerx dot synopsys dot com>
- Subject: Re: Stepanov results with development gcc
- From: Bruce Korb <bkorb at sco dot COM>
- Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 12:54:01 -0800
- CC: Daniel Berlin <dberlin at redhat dot com>, David Edelsohn <dje at watson dot ibm dot com>, Brad Lucier <lucier at math dot purdue dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation
- References: <200012082028.MAA24567@racerx.synopsys.com>
Joe Buck wrote:
>
> Daniel Berlin writes:
> > Yes.
> > In fact, on a gnupro 99r1 based branch compiler (BeOS) on x86, which is the
> > same time frame, we have better than perfect.
> > It's like .7 or .8.
>
> No, any report with a value < 1 is IMPERFECT, and large deviations
> from 1 indicate a bug.
By implication, that also means that 1.0 *may* be a bug:
the level zero being misoptimized and hiding the abstraction
penalty :-).
Maybe level zero should be done by hand in assembler? :-}