🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep11.225553.5638@tc.cornell.edu> bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
>
>Out of curiosity I checked with SPARA and MS-FORTRAN 5.0. I split
>the file into 3 files of approximately the same size, and compiled
>with the -FPi87 -G2 -AL -Od switches. I got:
>
>No failures, defects nor flaws have been discovered.
>Rounding appears to conform to proposed IEEE standard
>The arithmetic diagnosed appears to be Excellent!
>End of test
>
>Again 2.0 crashed, and this time DOS crashed as well. Only 1.3 
>survived.

I reran the dpara check under OS/2 2.0 on my machine with those flags
-FPi87 -G2 -AL -Od, and surprise surprise, MS Fortran 5.1 came out
with only one SERIOUS DEFECT (after milestone 160), and completed the
test.

But, BTW, for 1./0., the answer was, as before, 1.  And interestingly,
Paranoia did not flag that as being a problem.

(Dov: I could uuencode my dpara.exe and e-mail it to you.  That would
let us establish whether the difference we note is between 5.0 and
5.1 or between your and my machine.)

Luc