On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Reini Urban wrote:
> Igor Pechtchanski schrieb:
> > On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Douglas A. Vechinski wrote:
> >>To my knowledge, I'm not using floating point emulation. But if I was,
> >>how would I be able to check?
> >
> > Actually, my WAG may turn out to be right after all.
Igor Pechtchanski schrieb:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Douglas A. Vechinski wrote:
>>To my knowledge, I'm not using floating point emulation. But if I was,
>>how would I be able to check?
>
> Actually, my WAG may turn out to be right after all. Check the default
> target architecture (processor) for b
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Douglas A. Vechinski wrote:
> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
> >>Even though Case C, when the -mno-cygwin flag is not used, the
> >>difference is still significant. compared to Case A.
> >
> >That's not surprising. Cygwin is a POSIX emulation environment *on top*
> >of Windows --
Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
Even though Case C, when the -mno-cygwin flag is not used, the
difference is still significant. compared to Case A.
That's not surprising. Cygwin is a POSIX emulation environment *on top*
of Windows -- naturally the performance of any Cygwin tool will be slower
than t
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Douglas A. Vechinski wrote:
> I am experiencing significantly longer exection speeds when compiling
> with g77 under cygwin using the -mno-cygwin option.
Even though you're invoking the Cygwin g77, by using -mno-cygwin you're
essentially cross-compiling to the MinGW environme
I am experiencing significantly longer exection speeds when compiling
with g77 under cygwin using the -mno-cygwin option.
I primarily work and develop under Linux. However, I need to provide a
user with an executable (of a Fortran program) that runs under windows.
I initially performed some t
6 matches
Mail list logo
