Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Segments
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:16:07 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <95be976a187a0424bc1f9a52c9a1f06b@www.novabbs.org>
References: <vdlgl9$3kq50$2@dont-email.me> <2024Oct6.150415@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vl7m2b$6iat$1@paganini.bofh.team> <2025Jan3.093849@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vlcddh$j2gr$1@paganini.bofh.team> <2025Jan5.121028@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vleuou$rv85$1@paganini.bofh.team> <ndamnjpnt8pkllatkdgq9qn2turaao1f0a@4ax.com> <2025Jan6.092443@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <vlgreu$1lsr9$1@dont-email.me> <vlhjtm$1qrs5$1@dont-email.me> <bdZeP.23664$Hfb1.16566@fx46.iad> <vlj1pg$25p0e$1@dont-email.me> <W3bfP.515961$DYF8.447613@fx14.iad> <20250107170429.00003de2@yahoo.com> <18cc69cf39bb7b0df7fc8733f9ccaab6@www.novabbs.org> <vlk88j$2d9j6$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2521497"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="o5SwNDfMfYu6Mv4wwLiW6e/jbA93UAdzFodw5PEa6eU";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$BZaDFGjdNv8B/aXJF.tpi.dbBShSIptrEcvzZO6ckAUHvEd0qME9y
X-Rslight-Posting-User: cb29269328a20fe5719ed6a1c397e21f651bda71
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2295
Lines: 18

On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:01:55 +0000, Thomas Koenig wrote:

> MitchAlsup1 <mitchalsup@aol.com> schrieb:
-----------------
>> WATFIV would catch a(9,11)
>
> Every Fortran compiler I know has a bounds checking, but it is
> optional for all of them. People still leave it off for production
> code because it is too slow.
>
> It would really be great if the performance degradation was
> small enough so people would simply leave on the checks
> for production code.  (Side question: What does CHERI
> do with SIMD-vectorized code?)

How long does it take SW to construct the kinds of slices
a FORTRAN subroutine can hand off to another subroutine ??
That is a CHERRI capability that allows for access to every
even byte in a structure but no odd byte in the same structure ??