www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | Dave Love <d DOT love AT dl DOT ac DOT uk> |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: Netlib code [was Re: flops...] |
Date: | 17 Feb 1997 18:15:50 +0000 |
Organization: | Daresbury Laboratory, Warrington WA4 4AD, UK |
Lines: | 16 |
Message-ID: | <rzqlo8n1ep5.fsf@djlvig.dl.ac.uk> |
References: | <Pine DOT LNX DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 970208044630 DOT 1946B-100000 AT aditya DOT unigoa DOT ernet DOT in> <5dh4gi$ek9$1 AT superb DOT csc DOT ti DOT com> <1997Feb12 DOT 130129 DOT 27922 AT indyvax DOT iupui DOT edu> <5du4c0$kor$1 AT superb DOT csc DOT ti DOT com> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | djlvig.dl.ac.uk |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
>>>>> "Jesse" == Jesse Bennett <jesse AT lenny DOT dseg DOT ti DOT com> writes: Jesse> The sad thing (to me) is that well written C can perform at Jesse> least as well (and often better) than equivalent Fortran code Jesse> in numerical analysis applications. You mean there's some feature of C that makes it possible to optimize better than `equivalent' numerical Fortran with all the support F95 provides for performance (especially in parallel)? Which one? [The next version of G77 will specifically take advantage of the Fortran no-alias semantics to do optimizations which aren't possible for standard C.] -- ALGOL 60 is alive and well and living in FORTRAN 90. -- Tony Hoare
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |