Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!wuarchive!uwm.edu!rpi!sci.ccny.cuny.edu!notvax.ccny.cuny.edu!jeffrey
From: jeffrey@notvax.ccny.cuny.edu (Jeffrey Bromberger)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.3b1
Subject: Paranoia freaks under SVS Fortran!
Keywords: spara.f  SERIOUS DEFECTS
Message-ID: <1991Mar1.194517.10627@notvax.ccny.cuny.edu>
Date: 1 Mar 91 19:45:17 GMT
Sender: jeffrey@notvax.ccny.cuny.edu (Jeffrey Bromberger)
Reply-To: jeffrey@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Jeffrey Bromberger)
Followup-To: comp.sys.3b1
Organization: City College of New York - Science Computing Facility
Lines: 27

Before porting over a large graphic library, I decided to run the single
precision paranoia suite to see how well it handles floating point numbers.
I compiled the program by modifying the IN and OUT units to be 0 (as
opposed to the real-world's 5 and 6), and used 'fortran' with no other
options.  Well, here's what it found:

 The number of  SERIOUS DEFECTs  discovered =    1
 The number of  DEFECTs  discovered =            5
 The number of  FLAWs  discovered =              2
 The arithmetic diagnosed has unacceptable Serious Defects.
 End of Test.

I deleted a lot of the output, showing the flaws (14 pages worth of it).
Has anyone else tried to use paranoia to see how flakey it is?  I'm
going to try doing the double-precision fortran and the C versions and see
how they compare.  Keep your ears open!

BTW: If anyone out there is interested, I'm using V2.2 (from sometime
in 1984).  Anybody out there with LPIFortran want to try and run this for 
comparison?

j
-- 
Jeffrey L. Bromberger
System Operator---City College of New York---Science Computing Facility
jeffrey@sci.ccny.cuny.edu			jeffrey@ccnysci.BITNET
	Anywhere!{cmcl2,philabs,phri}!ccnysci!jeffrey