On Wed, 19 Jan 2011, Allin Cottrell wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Allin Cottrell wrote:
>
> > I've now modified the configure script in CVS, and I think that
> > things should now be right for the case where the compiler
> > supports sse2 but the CPU does not. That is, you shouldn't have to
> > manually --disable-sse2 to get a working binary.
> >
> > However, I can't check that definitively on my own machine.
>
> Just crossed my mind: what happens to random number generation on machines
> which don't support sse2 (which I assume is the case on non-x86
> architectures)? I have no time to check this right now, but I would assume
> we fall back on the old Mersenne Twister. But if this is the case, we'd
> have that scripts with the same seed would produce architecture-specific
> results. Do we want this?
The SFMT doesn't actually require sse2. I think it will just run
slower in the absence of sse2, but it's probably worth checking
to see if you get the same sequence, for a given seed, with
and without sse2.
Just checked: you get the same sequence from SFMT with and without
sse2, so we're OK.
Allin