Subject: Re: CCL:Benchmarks and Software

From: Peter Shenkin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 11:21:36 -0700 (PDT)

Hi,

I quite agree with a number of points that have been raised, 
including Dave's.

But I feel that people should be able to publish benchmarks 
performed with their software so that prospective users 
can then decide (1) whether those particular benchmarks are
relevant to their prospective uses, and (2) whether speed
matters at all.

What has only been implicit in all this is that some of the
providers of softare disallow, in the standard license agreement
which every user must sign, any publication of benchmarks.

This, I feel, is inimical to the further development of the entire
profession -- in fact, both professions (plural): computational
chemistry and software development in this area.

	-P.

On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, David Young wrote:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> 	I would like to point out that this conversation on benchmarks is
> a bit one dimensional.  There are some very popular (profitable) chemistry
> software packages that do poorly on benchmarks but sell because of other
> factors such as ease of use or functionality.  ...