🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4fl2nh$b66@sun20.ccd.bnl.gov>, olchansk@a2.phy.bnl.gov (Konstantin Olchanski) writes:
- 
- Well, while not exactly in the bugs department, but I have found
- 	that the SGI implementation of templates is significantly
- 	slower than GCC-
- 
- The GNU complex library uses templates, and when compiled
- 	by the SGI compiler, it's about 2 times slower
- 	than when compiled by G++ (both using -mips2 -O).
- 	If the GNU complex library is modified (to get rid
- 	of templates), the SGI-compiled code becomes as fast
- 	as the GCC-compiled code.

Essentially that is because the gcc implementation of templates is along
the lines of "proovide the minimum necessary to get it going", while
the ATT code (on which the SGI compiler is based) used a more general
approach.

The "complex" derived type is effectively too small to show the benefit 
of this generality, but gets to bear the full cost of it.

                             Thomas
-- 
*** Why not use metric units and get things right first time, every time.
*   email: cmaae47@ic.ac.uk (Thomas Sippel - Dau)
*   voice: +44 171 594 6904 (day), +44 171 594 6958 (fax), +44 171 385 6540
*   snail: ICSTM, Computing Services, Kensington SW7 2BX, Great Britain