This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: denormals/subnormals are heading for extinction


On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 dewar@gnat.com wrote:

> >>I am unqualified to judge one way or another. Nor did I.
>
> That sounds like you do not understand the important advantages of denormals.
> Again for a simple explanation, see chapter 5 of my book.

Sure, I'm interested in hearing why..

Title and/or Author of this book? (And/or got a URL for chapter 5?)

>
> No one ever said there is no cost to the implementation (having written
> several full IEEE software implementations, I know very well what the cost
> is), where did you get that idea?
>

Because you had said:

``Again, I am thinking about the entire overall performance of a complete
application (nothing else is relevant).''

Which indicated that you were ignoring any costs of implementaiton
complexity.


Scott.




Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]