This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: poor performance -- is Cygwin to blame?..

> In my experience with MPI programs, comparing cygwin and linux,
> message passing takes longer under cygwin, but the time may be made up
> elsewhere, if the compilation is truly similar.
> You mention that considerable time is spent in log(), pow(), exp()
> but leave us guessing how you implemented them.

I did not implement them. They are from whatever -lm means on Cygwin. I
use them to compute my own formula repeatedly for hundreds of different

> Then you imply that you think cygwin, rather than your math functions,
> is the speed determining factor, without giving us a means to judge.

They are not mine. There must be a misunderstanding...

> The glibc versions of these functions are much faster than the newlib
> versions, particularly if you permit the use of <mathinline.h>.
> Neither approach the potential of pentium4, but the simplest way to
> speed them up on cygwin is to employ something like <mathinline.h>,
> and to provide your own pow() (or to use a compiler and library which
> targets pentium4).

Can this be done with just CFLAGS? I really don't want to pollute my
code with ``#ifdef CYGWIN''... Thank you,


Unsubscribe info:
Bug reporting:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]