A move away from CLN?
Richard B. Kreckel
kreckel at thep.physik.uni-mainz.de
Tue Jul 24 09:52:33 CEST 2001
On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Duraid Madina wrote:
> > What is the exact problem? What alternative compiler are you having in
> > mind?
> The Intel C++ compiler, which rocks hard. It's turned into a hybrid of GCC
> and the KAI compiler, and it's just plain excellent, front-end and back!
The KAI compiler (now Intel) is definitely worth trying, as is SGI's
compiler. Both are trying very hard to be standard conforming. Tell us
if the static way works for you.
> > Note that CLN is ideally suited as a basis for computer algebra systems,
> > mainly for three reasons:
> > 1) Immediate types. An integer with absolute value smaller than 2^29
> > is immediate, not heap-allocated. Saves one indirection.
> Does NTL do this? I haven't looked. NTL feels a lot, lot faster than CLN,
> though this is just an awesomely subjective remark based on my experience
> with Not That Many programs I've written.
I really do challange this statement. Dan Bernstein has made an effort
and benchmarked some systems: <http://cr.yp.to/speed/mult.html>. This
measures multiplication only, though, and it is quite old. For CLN-1.1 I
have adjusted the break-even points for different algorithms anew and it
should be about twice as fast now. NTL may also have gained in the
meanwhile, of course.
> Hey! HEY! Are we _completely_ forgetting about the Win32 community? ;-)
> (Visual C++ 7 seems to be coming along half- (third-?) decently with regards
> to Compliance, it's funny how many MSVC 5/6 programs now break in 7 though.)
What is Win32? What is MSVC???
<Richard.Kreckel at Uni-Mainz.DE>
More information about the GiNaC-devel