Brian Dessent wrote:
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
... and in Fortran?
As long as you're using a recent gcc you can just use -mpc64.
How recent?
With GFortran 4.3.1 and
$ cat test_case.0.f90
program test_case
implicit none
integer :: k
integer, parameter :: DP = kind(1.D0),&
N = 2
Angelo Graziosi wrote:
> ... and in Fortran?
As long as you're using a recent gcc you can just use -mpc64.
Brian
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:
Dave Korn wrote:
Take a look at the (legendary) GCC PR323:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
... and in particular comment #60:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323#c60
... which has a bit of code you can adapt (google for the definition of
_FPU_SETCW, it's an inline a
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; cygwin@cygwin.com
> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 09:40:36 -0700
> Subject: RE: cygwin gcc: Different numerical results in thread vs in main()
>
> 1) The result from the within thread calculation matches my Mac output (note
> th
nt: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:06 AM
To: Richard Stanton; cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: RE: cygwin gcc: Different numerical results in thread vs in main()
> Try compiling with -ffloat-store then report back. google for
> "float-store excess precision gcc" to understand why th
Richard Stanton wrote on 04 August 2008 15:29:
> Thanks for the helpful information, David. Oddly, -ffloat-store doesn't
> seem to make any difference:
No, unfortunately it can't be assumed to; it'll only come into play if the
results get spilled to memory, rather than living in (x87) register
: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 07:29:14 -0700
> Subject: Re: cygwin gcc: Different numerical results in thread vs in main()
>
> Thanks for the helpful information, David. Oddly, -ffloat-store doesn't seem
> to make any difference:
>
> [c:\projects\threads]g
anton
Subject: RE: cygwin gcc: Different numerical results in thread vs in main()
Try compiling with -ffloat-store then report back. google for
"float-store excess precision gcc" to understand why this may help.
I don't recommend -ffloat-store as a fix, but it can help diagnose
Richard Stanton wrote:
> Main:t/1+t =0.0005609048868329022342546
> Thread 0: t/1+t =0.0005609048868329021258344
> Thread 1: t/1+t =0.0005609048868329021258344
> Thread 2: t/1+t =0.0005609048868329021258344
> Thread 3: t/1+t =0.0005609048868329021258344
The difference i
9 matches
Mail list logo
