delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | Michal Mertl <xmerm05 AT manes DOT vse DOT cz> |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: Watcom vs DJGPP |
Date: | Fri, 7 Nov 1997 17:03:03 +0100 |
Organization: | Prague University of Economics |
Lines: | 14 |
Message-ID: | <Pine.ULT.3.95.971107170014.15779A-100000@manes.vse.cz> |
References: | <1 DOT 5 DOT 4 DOT 32 DOT 19971103185401 DOT 006f5e38 AT dce03 DOT ipt DOT br> <63nhql$ri3 AT news DOT kom DOT tuwien DOT ac DOT at> <63th1e$ber$1 AT uni00nw DOT unity DOT ncsu DOT edu> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | manes.vse.cz |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
In-Reply-To: | <63th1e$ber$1@uni00nw.unity.ncsu.edu> |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
On 6 Nov 1997, Bennett Crowell wrote: > a 486 under DOS and also under Windows 95. The programs involved are > doing operations on matrices of up to 1000 X 2000 four-byte > floating point elements. Profiling indicates that most of the time > is spent in the matrix multiply routine. So far the Watcom product > seems to generate code that is at least equal to and usually a few > percent faster than gcc. Gcc is known not to optimize well fpu instructions, I don't know about pgcc. Anyone ? Michal "MiMe" Mertl xmerm05 AT vse DOT cz
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |