Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ncar!ames!vsi1!wyse!mips!dce
From: dce@mips.COM (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: SPARC vs. MIPS on gcc
Keywords: SPARC, MIPS
Message-ID: <10151@dunkshot.mips.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 88 19:23:06 GMT
References: <82150@sun.uucp> <697@hscfvax.harvard.edu>
Reply-To: dce@mips.COM (David Elliott)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 15

In article <697@hscfvax.harvard.edu> pavlov@hscfvax.harvard.edu (G.Pavlov) writes:
>  Why did you not use a current-generation MIPS in the comparison ???

In another article, I stated that this didn't matter.  I wasn't
paying attention to the original article enough to realize that
there were some system-dependent things being measured with respect
to the cache.

I tried to cancel that article, but upon failing that, am submitting
this retraction.  If our news administrator can figure out how to
cancel this article, he can cancel the other one as well.

-- 
David Elliott		dce@mips.com  or  {ames,prls,pyramid,decwrl}!mips!dce
"Did you see his eyes?  Did you see his crazy eyes?" -- Iggy (who else?)