From: Jose (jmalv04_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-09 16:39:09
My results are using gcc 4.0.1
I agree the benchmark is quite silly so maybe each of you should come up
with a mixed-operation benchmark that exploits your library well and then we
can run both benchmarks
This is not intended to pit one library against the other but to gain some
insights on which approaches bring best performance
I think it would also be useful to have RTL's basic distance example shown
in RML and then benchmark that with 10k+ points
On 10/9/05, Calum Grant <calum_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > PS: my results for RTL (MinGW with optimization) --3094ms.
> > My PC has a 1.5 GHz processor.
> I should warn you both that gcc's ability to optimize RML is quite poor.
> I had to move to gcc 4.0.1 to get decent performance. VC7.1 does a much
> better job, which is where my number came from.
> I also don't really understand the purpose of this "benchmark". The
> test itself does nothing useful other than to probe the index 1000000
> times. It would be better with a real-life problem.
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk