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."