Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:50:28 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Stefan Ehmann <shoesoft@gmx.net> Cc: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: Let's use gcc-4.2, not 4.1 -- OpenMP Message-ID: <24131.1166205028@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:09:52 %2B0100." <200612151609.53750.shoesoft@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200612151609.53750.shoesoft@gmx.net>, Stefan Ehmann writes: >On Friday 15 December 2006 14:39, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> Unfortunately, that is not what you have done, because you have >> not indicated what the standard deviation on your numbers are, >> so they are totally worthless. >I've done 3 runs on an otherwise pretty idle system with a maximum deviation >of maybe 1 million instructions. So I figured that accurately calculating the >standard deviation would overshoot the mark for this primitive test. If you had included this information, all would have been fine. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?24131.1166205028>