Rog at vitanuova already caught how stupid the following article is
(linked to from slashdot):

	http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5602

It took me much longer -- until I looked at their "C" code (term used
very loosely) trying to compile it on Plan 9...  There are multiple
gems in it including ++ on a double, mid-function variable definitions
(C-code, right?), log10(0.0), impossible to look at I/O, etc.  In
fact, I'm attaching the benchmark for your viewing pleasure :)

Anyway, the exercise took very little time and here are some "results"
showing how good Plan 9's compiler are (where's a Bushnell when you
need one?), it would be interesting to see how the long arithmetic can be improved:

pcc (code untouched except for mid-function variable definitions moved to top):

	Int arithmetic elapsed time: 17540 ms with intMax of 1000000000
	 i: 1000000001
	 intResult: 1
	Double arithmetic elapsed time: 65500 ms with doubleMin 10000000000.000000, doubleMax 11000000000.000000
	 i: 11000000000.000000
	 doubleResult: 10011632717.495501
	Long arithmetic elapsed time: 262540 ms with longMin I64d, longMax I64d
	 i: I64d
	 longResult: I64d
	Trig elapsed time: 25070 ms with max of 10000000
	 i: 10000000.000000
	 sine: 0.990665
	 cosine: -0.136322
	 tangent: -7.267119
	 logarithm: 7.000000
	 squareRoot: 3162.277502
	[crashes during the last test while reading back the file it just wrote]

gcc (code untouched, no -O):

	Int arithmetic elapsed time: 23770 ms with intMax of 1000000000
	 i: 1000000001
	 intResult: 1
	Double arithmetic elapsed time: 56040 ms with doubleMin 10000000000.000000, doubleMax 11000000000.000000
	 i: 11000000000.000000
	 doubleResult: 10011632717.495501
	Long arithmetic elapsed time: 53500 ms with longMin I64d, longMax I64d
	 i: I64d
	 longResult: I64d
	Trig elapsed time: 30680 ms with max of 10000000
	 i: 10000000.000000
	 sine: 0.990665
	 cosine: -0.136322
	 tangent: -7.267119
	 logarithm: 7.000000
	 squareRoot: 3162.277502
	[crashes during the last test while reading back the file it just wrote]

8c (modified to use nsec() for timing, printf -> print, fixed log10(0.0) crash, fix %I64d in print()):

	Int arithmetic elapsed time: 17517 ms with intMax of 1000000000
	 i: 1000000001
	 intResult: 1
	Double arithmetic elapsed time: 22525 ms with doubleMin 10000000000.000000, doubleMax 11000000000.000000
	 i: 11000000000.000000
	 doubleResult: 10011632717.495500
	Long arithmetic elapsed time: 565067 ms with longMin 10000000000, longMax 11000000000
	 i: 11000000000
	 longResult: 776627965
	Trig elapsed time: 25881 ms with max of 10000000
	 i: 10000000.100000
	 sine: 0.972106
	 cosine: -0.234542
	 tangent: -4.144701
	 logarithm: 7.000000
	 squareRoot: 3162.277518


It is important to note that the integer performance of 8c is
comparable to gcc 3.3's -O[23] running on Plan 9 and Linux
respectively.  The double arithmetic lags by about 20%.  The I/O is
comparable (2x slower when going over a 100mbit link, no caching).

Profiling the long long code to see where it looses all that time may
be interesting.

All computation performed on a 8-way 700mhz Xeon, only 1 cpu used :)

Sorry for wasting your time -- just wanted to see how good 8c was and
got caught in all the other crap. It's Friday after all... :)

Andrey