Re: [BENCHMARK] Corrected gcc3.2 v gcc2.95.3 contest results

[Oliver Xymoron]

On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:24:49AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote:
> 
> That is the system I was considering. I just need to run enough
> benchmarks to make this worthwhile though. That means about 5 for
> each it seems - which may take me a while. A basic mean will suffice
> for a measure of central tendency. I also need to quote some measure
> of variability. Standard deviation?

No, standard deviation is inappropriate here. We have no reason to
expect the distribution of problem cases to be normal or even smooth.
What we'd really like is range and mean. Don't throw out the outliers
either, the pathological cases are of critical interest.

-- 
 "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."