<div>Sorry I don't really understand. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>So is there any difference in optimization between the 2 libraries? Or is it just extensive additional "assert type"?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thank you.<br><br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 1/30/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Barry Smith</b> <<a href="mailto:bsmith@mcs.anl.gov">bsmith@mcs.anl.gov</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><br>PETSc also does extensive additional "assert type" testing of input arguments<br>to functions etc in the debug version.
<br><br> Barry<br><br><br>On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Matthew Knepley wrote:<br><br>> On 1/29/07, Ben Tay <<a href="mailto:zonexo@gmail.com">zonexo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> ><br>> > Hi,<br>> ><br>> > May I know what's the difference between the optimized and debugging
<br>> > version?<br>> ><br>> > Have the optimization flags such as -O3 been used in the compilcation of<br>> > the libraries for the optimized one? Whereas for the debugging version,<br>> > there is no optimization by the compiler?
<br>> ><br>><br>> It is just the difference in compiler flags. You would have to look at the<br>> compiler documentation.<br>><br>> If my program works fine in the debugging version, does it mean that I will
<br>> > not get errors in the optimized version?<br>> ><br>><br>> Most likely.<br>><br>> Matt<br>><br>> Thanks<br>> ><br>><br><br></blockquote></div><br>