Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pioneer.arc.nasa.gov!eugene From: eugene@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov.arpa (Eugene N. Miya) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Dhrystone 2.1 Keywords: integer benchmark Message-ID: <11802@ames.arc.nasa.gov> Date: 14 Jul 88 21:44:29 GMT References: <517@pcrat.UUCP> <2294@sugar.UUCP> <391@attila.weitek.UUCP> <4936@husc6.harvard.edu> Sender: usenet@ames.arc.nasa.gov Reply-To: eugene@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Eugene N. Miya) Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif. Lines: 21 Yet another dull benchmarking argument. Oh, Ehud makes an interesting point. You use the word "prediction." Like in the film Apocolypse Now, where Brando asks Sheen about his "method," Sheen says, "What method?" I say "What prediction?" These stones aren't predictors, at best they are descriptors, nothing more. I don't see many predictive tools out there. If I did, I would have a tool which tells me a Dhrystone will run XXX fast on a YYY. This is a prediction. I runs the Stones and I get ZZZ, this is a verification attempt and description. If I try to relate ZZZ to payroll program (or what ever), that's a extrapolation (at best). Prediction is held in high esteem. I would like to see more prediction tools. Another gross generalization from --eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers: "Mailers?! HA!", "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology." {uunet,hplabs,ncar,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene "Send mail, avoid follow-ups. If enough, I'll summarize."