Hi,
Intel's C++ compilers also have poor (nonexistent?) quality assurance.
I'm not sure how much Intel's poor engineering (interface changes,
goofy directory structure etc) affects the C++ crowd, but
Ive figured since around version 6 that their poor practices would
catch up with them; they dont seem to have; and intel doesnt seem to
be improving their practices:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/showthread.php?t=62095
I'll plan to submit a bug report to them with as little effort on
my part as possible.
As far as other compilers, we've had good luck with PGI at OSC
although there have been several amber bug reports related to pgi
compilers and at least one of them (117) is a compiler preprocessor bug.
In addition we recommend ACML.
The OSC system admins are very conservative on installing Intel
products; here's what we have:
intel-compilers-9.1-20070320
intel-compilers-10.0.023
intel-compilers-11.1.056
mkl-10.0.3.020
Scott
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 04:40:48PM -0500, Robert Duke wrote:
> I agree with you in principle; the problem here is that about every third
> release of the intel compiler is broken or the interfaces are changed, or
> mkl is screwed up, etc. etc. I see no hope of staying ahead of them with
> workarounds, so as long as we are using that compiler, I think we are going
> to be stuck recommending versions that work. We went through this bigtime
> with them on itanium; they apparently now have hit a point in their own
> complexity or have lost a vision of a solid product, or something. What I
> would recommend against is funky workarounds, just to get some bloody
> version to work; formally more correct f90-f95, well I can see that, as
> long as you don't then break other compilers.
> Regards - Bob
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ross Walker" <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>
> >>As a workaround, I would revert to a bloody release of ifort that
> >>works...
> >>There is no requirement for our code to function with broken compilers,
> >>in
> >>my opinion, at least...
> >
> >Agreed. Except teaching that to some users who may have trouble
> >understanding exactly what a compiler is let alone which version it is is
> >about as much fun as pulling teeth so if we can find a simple (and benign)
> >workaround this is easier than trying to explain how to obtain older
> >versions of the compilers and/or file a bug report with Intel etc.
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Mar 09 2010 - 21:00:03 PST
