Steve Kargl wrote: > On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 02:50:30PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > >>On Friday 15 December 2006 05:50, Scott Long wrote: >> >>>Yes, the industry moves fast, but that's no reason to fool ourselves >>>into thinking that the FSF will support GCC 4.2 a day after they release >>>4.3 and start working on 4.4. Your point above about the lifespan of >>>FreeBSD 7.x is a valid one, and I agree that it should be a >>>consideration. Vendor support is a myth and should not be a >>>consideration. >> >>Not to mention it is *trivial* to install a compiler using ports or packages. >> >>If you are serious about high performance computing installing a new compiler >>is about the lowest barrier you'll find. >> > > > Actually, 4.1.x will produce much worse code than 3.4.6. > You can search the gcc mail listings for extensive comparison > by Clinton Whaley (the author of math/atlas) for details. > Has this been fixed in GCC 4.2? If the FSF claims to have fixed it, has it been actually verified? I thought that gcc 4 was supposed to solve the world's problems with vectorization. ScottReceived on Fri Dec 15 2006 - 04:43:17 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:03 UTC