GCC 3.0 Release Criteria

[Mumit Khan]

Toon Moene <toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> writes:
> 
> > Since LAPACK performance depends heavily on BLAS performance
> > (a lower-level subroutine library called by LAPACK), perhaps the
> > release criteria should say explicitly what BLAS versions will be used?
> > I would suggest either the reference implementation (very vanilla Fortran),
> > or (probably more realistic) the Kagstrom, Ling, and Van Loan GEMM-based
> > implementation (still portable Fortran, but tuned for computers with
> > caches).  Both are available from the same netlib sites that distribute
> > LAPACK.
> 
> Hmmm, I never tried anything else than the default BLAS - eeks, more
> options to test ...

The default BLAS tends to be rather bad on most machines, with just a 
few exceptions.

Toon, how do you feel about using Atlas http://www.netlib.org/atlas/
instead of LAPACK-3.0 (or in addition to LAPACK 2.0)? 

Regards,
Mumit