X-pop3-spooler: POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 4 980420 -bs-
From: johan19 AT idt DOT net
Message-ID: <19980713183547.A5171@sophia.idt.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 18:35:47 -0400
To: beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl
Subject: Re: executable speed.
Mail-Followup-To: beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 32 DOT 19980712173801 DOT 0098b210 AT xs4all DOT nl> <m3g1g5lmm1 DOT fsf AT deneb DOT cygnus DOT stuttgart DOT netsurf DOT de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i
In-Reply-To: <m3g1g5lmm1.fsf@deneb.cygnus.stuttgart.netsurf.de>; from Florian Weimer on Mon, Jul 13, 1998 at 06:52:22PM +0200
Sender: Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
Status: RO
Content-Length: 743
Lines: 20

On Mon, Jul 13, 1998 at 06:52:22PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Vincent Diepeveen <diep AT xs4all DOT nl> writes:
> 
> > I compared speeds between compilers for my chess program at my pentium pro
> > 200Mhz running linux.
> > 
> > Speed of 2.7.2 is 10% slower than msvc++
> 
> Did you compare FPU-intensive code?  MSVC uses only 53 bits of
> precision for floats, compared to 64 bit which is traditionally used
> by GNU implementations.

really?  how does MSVC do that?  does it not use the FPU?  the last
microsoft compiler i used was msc-6.0 back in '90 and for 16bit int
apps.  floating point back then was the unholy mix of 80bit in FPU
getting saved into 64bit (and occasionally 32bit) floats.

GNU compilers seem to do the same thing.

johan