Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 02:28:58 +0100
From: Marc Lehmann <pcg AT opengroup DOT org>
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: pgcc-2.95.2: strange nbench results
Message-ID: <19991103022858.I9319@cerebro.laendle>
Mail-Followup-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
References: <Pine DOT LNX DOT 4 DOT 10 DOT 9911020245200 DOT 14261-100000 AT goliath DOT csn DOT tu-chemnitz DOT de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9911020245200.14261-100000@goliath.csn.tu-chemnitz.de>; from Ronald Wahl on Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 02:49:05AM +0100
X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.2.13 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version 2.95.1 19990816 (release)) 
Sender: Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 02:49:05AM +0100, Ronald Wahl <rwahl AT gmx DOT net> wrote:

Iiiih, 'n gmx-er.

> moin,

Iiih, 'n Norddeutscher ;->

> just run nbench-byte-2.1 compiled with pgcc-2.95.2 (-mk6 -O6 -ffast-math
> -funroll-all-loops). Look especially at the neural net bench:

I think this is a large improvement.. IIRC, nbench always segfaulted on the
neural net test, now it only gives a wrong result ;->

Seriously, this is probably a bug in pgcc, although (having inspected the
test some times) it's not clear to me wether the compiler isn't allowed to
just optimize it away...

-- 
      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT opengroup DOT org |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
                                                         |