This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Inline round for IA64

From: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, wilson at specifixinc dot com, Geoff Keating <geoffk at desire dot geoffk dot org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 04:08:16 +0100
Subject: Re: Inline round for IA64
References: <20040116011323.EA9F75BFE6@ds20.nudt.edu.cn> <20040117153403.B17897@redhat.com> <jm1xpxstz2.fsf@desire.geoffk.org> <20040118071111.GB2074@redhat.com> <200401182044.i0IKiphS020556@desire.geoffk.org> <20040118214254.GC14591@redhat.com>

Ah.  I would have expected the library to enforce a constant number
of bits in the fraction, making that second number ill-formed.

I can't even imagine what the lack of such constancy does to
analysis of floating point algorithms...

Hey, it can only give better accuracy (yes, yes: _per operation_).

The real reason of course is that it is (much) cheaper to implement.

Segher

References:
- Inline round for IA64
  - From: Canqun Yang
- Re: Inline round for IA64
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Inline round for IA64
  - From: Geoff Keating
- Re: Inline round for IA64
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Inline round for IA64
  - From: Geoff Keating
- Re: Inline round for IA64
  - From: Richard Henderson

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