Bill, Thanks for clarifying the issue.
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 08:14:58PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote: > Admittedly, this is a bug in pari and gap for having such requirement. > However, > it seems unlikely to be ever fixed, hence this report. > > Using 8 should result in a faster library, so this is a trade-off, even if I > do not expect that people will use x32 for HPC. OK, so this trade-off is the real issue. What is the best choice? On the one hand, 8 should be faster but how much faster? Enough to matter? If not, the choice is clear: switch to 4. If the speed difference matters, then the question is whether pari and gap are important enough to x32 that we should accept the lower speed. I don't know, myself, but my gut instinct is to leave the size at 8 and exclude x32 from the architectures for pari and gap. For now, I'll leave this bug open for opinions. Thanks, -Steve
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
