gcc extension versus external library

[Hesham Moustafa]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 5:58 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Mohamed Abou Samra
> <my_abousamra@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I'd like to know the performance differences between any gcc extension and other external library I link it to my code as I linked Intel's DFP library to my code and I used the gcc extension for the DFP in another code but with the same structure and I found the Intel's code is faster than the gcc's one and I heared that gcc extension should be faster than any other linked library! So, what do u think with that? which should be faster?
>>
>
> The current DFP support in libgcc is based on the very old Intel DFP
> library.  We are planning to update it to the current Intel DFP library.

I thought that gcc implements its own DPF library according to IEEE
2008-754 standard and does not rely on Intel library.
Please tell me if that's not the case, also what about decimal/dpd (
which does not rely on Intel library) ? is it based on another library
( IBM )
or gcc entirely implements it ?

regards,
Hesham
>
> --
> H.J.