Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!gatech!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f From: gl8f@astsun7.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks Subject: Re: Anyone volunteer to do Fortran vs. C on SPECmarks? Message-ID: <1990Dec19.160708.13674@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Date: 19 Dec 90 16:07:08 GMT References: <1990Dec19.032301.4449@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <15180@ogicse.ogi.edu> Sender: news@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia Lines: 16 In article burley@pogo.ai.mit.edu (Craig Burley) writes: > 3. A straightforward translation of Fortran into C is going to lose > most of the semantic advantages of Fortran while still, most likely, > preserving its disadvantages; comparing the result to a program > written originally in C is likely to be unfair, because the C > version probably won't incorporate any of the disadvantages imposed > by Fortran. The thing that I was out to test was NOT codes that could take advantage of C, but codes which were ideally suited to Fortran. I could bore you with details, but I think several of the SPECmark programs fall nicely into this category. When I get back from break I'm going to run my hydrocode through f2c; I can assure you that to the best of my (limited ;-) knowledge, there's no faster way to do the algorithms in C.