Re: amber-developers: Apple's feed back for amber.

From: John Mongan <>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:27:13 -0700

David A. Case wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005, Robert Duke wrote:
>>Okay, I looked at the apple G5 pmemd performance optimizations...
>>There are significant changes
>>everywhere in the 9 codebase, and adapting this stuff to 9 will probably
>>nontrivial. I would recommend we let apple support this level of patch
>>themselves, releasing it on their applications website or whatever;
> Sounds fine to me. We did recently post a "efficiency patch" for
> that was processor-specific. But in that case, we have Roberto to
> support for it. (And here as well, the transition to Amber 9 will be
> non-trivial....)

Just to make explicit something that's probably well known to all
concerned here: Apple's interest in producing/supporting/maintaining G5
and Altivec specific codes and optimizations is likely to wane rapidly
in the coming months as they transition to Intel processors. This may be
a further reason to avoid incorporating these patches into the main
codestream, especially if they're going to be disruptive.

Received on Wed Apr 05 2006 - 23:49:54 PDT
Custom Search