> > There were some numbers somewhere on the net. However Dhrystones were very
> > susceptible to compiler optimizations
> 
> Contrary to the Dhrystone author, _I_ think this is a _good thing_.

You wouldn't if you knew what compilers actually _do_ to Dhrystone.

Having been responsible for 68k Dhrystone numbers at a past job, I can
say with some authority that the Dhrystone 2.1 code contains many
constructs that can be partially (or totally) optimized into oblivion
simply because they produce no useful result -- the compiler figures
this out in a safe manner and then just blows the code away.

So if your apps have lots of subroutines that are really just complicated
delay loops, fine. Otherwise don't use Dhrystone to make any buying
decisions.

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ best.com