LAPACK Archives

[Lapack] xLAMCH


Langou, Julien wrote:
I agree with Sven. 

We have for a long time waited to solve the problem and enumerated the 
solutions. I think it's time to move on and release a full thread safe 
Sven's solution is fine with me. It's a starting point (does not work on non 
IEEE machine). I am not against using FORTRAN 90 INTRINSIC as is done in 
This latter solution would impose on the user to have a F90 compiler. 

I can't believe that many people are running on non-IEEE machinees.
And to cater for them, all you need to do is decide at install time
whether you are IEEE or not (by calling the current xLAMCH).
If you are, use the hard coded IEEE xLAMCH. Otherwise, use the current
xLAMCH, and no-one is worse off.



-----Original Message-----
From: lapack-bounces@Domain.Removed on behalf of Sven Hammarling
Sent: Sat 9/1/2007 1:45 PM
To: lapack@Domain.Removed
Cc: Mick Pont
Subject: [Lapack] xLAMCH
Dear LAPACKers,

Following the helpful messages from Jeremy Barnes, I would like to press 
the request, that I have made in the past, that we supply an IEEE 
version of xLAMCH.  My colleague, Mick Pont, has pointed out that we 
have already moved xLAMCH into the INSTALL directory, and so we could 
test for an IEEE machine at install time using the current xLAMCH and 
move a hard coded version into SRC if the machine parameters are IEEE.

Best wishes,

Lapack mailing list

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star.

The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

For additional information you may use the LAPACK/ScaLAPACK Forum.
Or one of the mailing lists, or