Lahey Support
08-15-2003, 01:19 AM
>> In a recent article "Comparing Fortran 90 and C++ Valarrays" in C/C++ Users
Journal, the authors (Shyam Bhat and B. Arun) compared MSVC++ 5.0 and
Microsoft PowerStation v 4.0 <<
The first problem is the title of the article. It should have been called "Comparing MSVC++ 5.0 and Microsoft PowerStation v 4.0, using a single nonstandard benchmark program on a single Pentium 150MHz microcomputer with 48MB of RAM."
To consider this a comparison of the general speed of two languages is ludicrous. To even consider it a reasonable comparison of the two compilers is silly -- unless the user is only interested in running that one program on that particular computer under that particular operating system (which was not stated in the original post).
Both compilers have been superceded. MS has updated C++ and abandoned Powerstation, which suggests that maybe it wasn't a very good Fortran compiler to begin with. (Digital claims to have totally rewritten DVF, not modified the MS compiler.) It was also a generation behind the C++ compiler used. Of more interest would be a suite of comparable benchmarks run across a variety of respected C ++ and Fortran compilers on several hardware configurations. That might begin to approximate a comparison of the current state of the compiler art as applied to each language.
The second problem is that C/C++ Users Journal would publish such an article, under either title. I haven't seen it. I hope it included some discussion of its limitations.
--
Michael Prager [address removed]
Chief, Salmon Analysis Branch
Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NMFS/NOAA
Tiburon, California 94920 USA
Journal, the authors (Shyam Bhat and B. Arun) compared MSVC++ 5.0 and
Microsoft PowerStation v 4.0 <<
The first problem is the title of the article. It should have been called "Comparing MSVC++ 5.0 and Microsoft PowerStation v 4.0, using a single nonstandard benchmark program on a single Pentium 150MHz microcomputer with 48MB of RAM."
To consider this a comparison of the general speed of two languages is ludicrous. To even consider it a reasonable comparison of the two compilers is silly -- unless the user is only interested in running that one program on that particular computer under that particular operating system (which was not stated in the original post).
Both compilers have been superceded. MS has updated C++ and abandoned Powerstation, which suggests that maybe it wasn't a very good Fortran compiler to begin with. (Digital claims to have totally rewritten DVF, not modified the MS compiler.) It was also a generation behind the C++ compiler used. Of more interest would be a suite of comparable benchmarks run across a variety of respected C ++ and Fortran compilers on several hardware configurations. That might begin to approximate a comparison of the current state of the compiler art as applied to each language.
The second problem is that C/C++ Users Journal would publish such an article, under either title. I haven't seen it. I hope it included some discussion of its limitations.
--
Michael Prager [address removed]
Chief, Salmon Analysis Branch
Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NMFS/NOAA
Tiburon, California 94920 USA