<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Release now available</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.adobe.com/cplusplusperformance/2008/05/release_now_available.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.adobe.com/cplusplusperformance/2008/05/release_now_available.html</link>
	<description>Chris Cox on C++ Performance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 10 May 2009 20:09:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: kuranes</title>
		<link>http://blogs.adobe.com/cplusplusperformance/2008/05/release_now_available.html#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>kuranes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 07:34:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.adobe.com/cplusplusperformance/2008/05/release_now_available.html#comment-4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Very interesting project and Idea.

About how to display results, I find that &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tantalon.com/pete/cppopt/main.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;C++ Optimization Strategies and Techniques&lt;/a&gt;
is a good reference/categorization.

Always hoped for an updated/dynamic version of the above site (obviously more &quot;second goal&quot;, more developer oriented than compiler vendor).

About &quot;WhatToTest&quot; from wiki page list : OpenMP should IMHO really be part of benchmarks. Here&#039;s already some on &lt;a href=&quot;http://pogl.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/icc-gcc-and-openmp/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;ICC, GCC and OpenMP&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;i&gt;[ OpenMP is on my long term goals list.  First I want standard C++ features and common compiler optimizations tested, and those are already a very long list - ccox ]&lt;/i&gt;

I would love user submittable results, automatically processed, so that CPU/arch types  would be displayable using dynamics graphs a la &quot;gapminder&quot;, with user comments per test  to discuss in depth each.

Again, Very nice idea and nice work already.

&lt;i&gt;[ Thank you - ccox  ]&lt;/i&gt;
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting project and Idea.</p>
<p>About how to display results, I find that <a href="http://www.tantalon.com/pete/cppopt/main.htm" rel="nofollow">C++ Optimization Strategies and Techniques</a><br />
is a good reference/categorization.</p>
<p>Always hoped for an updated/dynamic version of the above site (obviously more &#8220;second goal&#8221;, more developer oriented than compiler vendor).</p>
<p>About &#8220;WhatToTest&#8221; from wiki page list : OpenMP should IMHO really be part of benchmarks. Here&#8217;s already some on <a href="http://pogl.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/icc-gcc-and-openmp/" rel="nofollow">ICC, GCC and OpenMP</a></p>
<p><i>[ OpenMP is on my long term goals list.  First I want standard C++ features and common compiler optimizations tested, and those are already a very long list - ccox ]</i></p>
<p>I would love user submittable results, automatically processed, so that CPU/arch types  would be displayable using dynamics graphs a la &#8220;gapminder&#8221;, with user comments per test  to discuss in depth each.</p>
<p>Again, Very nice idea and nice work already.</p>
<p><i>[ Thank you - ccox  ]</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
