Keith Bierman wrote:
> Richard E Maine wrote:
>> Admittedly, computers have gotten fast enough that it has gotten hard
>> for me to time the original version by hand, so these days I override
>> its normal algorithm and tell it to use one that's bad enough that I
>> can ask for 500 iterations and it will actually do that many instead of
>> stopping after 4 or 5 because it has converged. :-)
>
> so it spends all it's time computing near zero? If so, it sounds like
> it's going to be pretty distorted in that few applications spend nearly
> all of their time in underflow ;>
Well, that would put Suns (SPARCS running Solaris) at a severe
disadvantage, I agree - most systems seem to cope, though ..
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: [log in to unmask] - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Maintainer, GNU Fortran 77: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
A maintainer of GNU Fortran 95: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/
|