Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 12:26:27 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Dave Love <d DOT love AT dl DOT ac DOT uk>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Netlib code [was Re: flops...]
In-Reply-To: <rzqlo8n1ep5.fsf@djlvig.dl.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970218122520.20000K-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On 17 Feb 1997, Dave Love wrote:

> >>>>> "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.]

To the best of my knowledge, Fortran indeed can be optimized better than 
C, mainly because of the pointer aliasing issue.