Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!eos!eugene
From: eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.benchmarks
Subject: Re: Interlanguage comparison
Keywords: calibration
Message-ID: <7730@eos.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 21 Dec 90 09:08:57 GMT
References: <7729@eos.arc.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Calif.
Lines: 21

BTW:
In case you missed the thread I am trying to show (that included
the summary of an unknown program (acutally EMPTY) using HPM Group 0).
Let me give you a few hints of things to come.
1) Starting with this calibration (not a fair one we shall see, but it
appears fair), I'll add (really) simple work.  2) I'll try to show
real examples of "over-optimization."  3) How to work around one or
two of these.  4) Try to show hardware and software artifacts.
5) Considering sampling strategies: one or two proposals which might be
radical. 6) Show how a few programs might have deceptive execution.
7) Consider interesting analogies of performance measurement
(Mine are photography: Muybridge [Stanford], Edgerton [MIT & EG&G].
Rafael's is audio equipment.  Othersm might use cars. etc.)
8) Cover real "hard" topics like parallelism, data flow languages and
machines, equivalence, timing scope, synchronization. Etc.

But first, skiing and climbing.

--e.n. miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov
  {uunet,mailrus,most gateways}!ames!eugene
  AMERICA: CHANGE IT OR LOSE IT.