--- Comment #92 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2007-03-09 20:22 ---
I'd like to welcome the newest members of the bug 323 community, where all x87
floating point errors in gcc come to die! All floating point errors that use
the x87 are welcome, despite the fact that many of
--- Comment #10 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-19 17:18 ---
Guys,
In the interests of full disclosure, I did some quick timings on the Core2Duo,
and as I kind of suspected, scalar SSE crushed x87 there. I was pretty sure
scalar SSE could achieve 2 flop/cycle, while Intel
--- Comment #9 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-19 16:04 ---
Ian,
Thanks for the info. I see I failed to consider the cross-register moves you
mentioned. However, can't those be moved through memory, where something
destined for a 64-bit register is first written fro
--- Comment #7 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-19 00:31 ---
>Depends on what you mean by fixable by the programmer because most people don't
know anything about precusion issues.
Most people don't know programming at all, so I guess you are suggesting that
er
--- Comment #5 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-18 22:14 ---
I cannot, of course, force you to admit it, but 323 is a bug fixable by the
programmer, and this one is not. The other requires a lot of work in the
compiler, and this does not. So, viewing them as the same can be
--- Comment #3 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-18 21:16 ---
BTW, in case it isn't obvious, here's the fix that I typically use for problems
like bug 323 that I cannot when it is gcc itself that is unpredictably spilling
the computation:
void test(double x
--- Comment #2 from whaley at cs dot utsa dot edu 2006-12-18 20:43 ---
Hi,
While it may be decided not to fix this problem, this is not a duplicate of bug
323, and so it should be closed for another reason if you want to ignore it.
323 has a problem because of the function call, where
7 matches
Mail list logo
