Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Message-ID | <4DCEE46F.4020907@SPAM.comp-arch.net> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-14 13:22 -0700 |
| From | "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| Organization | comp-arch.net |
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring |
| References | <ikaggo$mi2$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <qmmms6h8met2ha0akir6jb71kasnna7c3f@4ax.com> <iqg5ko$drk$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> <4DCCA37C.6090505@SPAM.comp-arch.net> <iqir93$r64$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
On 5/13/2011 1:48 AM, nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > Andy \"Krazy\" Glew<andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote: >> >>>> No, actually, it looked like he was asking leading questions that >>>> pointed in the direction of getting rid of silent NaNs. >>> >>> Yes. There, I agree with him - but every language that I know of >>> that has supported IEEE 754 NaNs has got rid of signalling ones, >>> or deprecated them into near uselessness! >>> >>> I can't tell you whether he lost the argument in 1984 or changed >>> his views, but quiet NaN comparison was one of the things that >>> made me splutter when I first read IEEE 754. I then did a test >>> on myself, and took considerable care coding - but I had still >>> got 20% of the tests wrong for correct NaN handling! >> >> I'm not so sure: quiet NaNs or the equivalent are necessary for things >> like spreadsheets, where you still want to put values into cells even if >> they do calculations like 1/-0(=-inf), or 0/0 or other indeterminate values. >> >> There *must* be a not-number value. Just like null in databases. Data >> occasionally is missing. > > No, that's completely wrong. IEEE NaN has totally the wrong semantics > for missing values, and they are primarily error indicators. I am a > statistician by training, and have worked with some of the people > who introduced missing values into modern computing. > > I have a part-written paper that describes something half a dozen > classes of "Not A Number", and the key factor is that they all have > different and usually incompatible semantics. I'd love to see the paper, half written or not. It sounds like the paper on the 7 different flavors of database null.
Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-07 03:06 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-07 09:44 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-07 11:38 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-07 12:21 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-07 13:47 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-07 09:55 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-07 19:27 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-07 13:54 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-09 13:38 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> - 2011-05-10 12:40 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-10 20:32 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2011-05-09 13:42 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-07 04:26 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-07 12:13 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-07 14:59 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-09 14:14 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-09 20:38 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-09 13:55 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-10 09:05 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Jason Riedy <jason@lovesgoodfood.com> - 2011-05-10 13:24 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-10 18:41 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 13:56 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 14:04 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 14:06 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-11 13:55 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-11 22:15 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-12 20:52 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 20:20 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-12 14:55 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-13 12:25 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 11:18 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 13:19 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-14 19:11 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-12 20:08 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Jason Riedy <jason@lovesgoodfood.com> - 2011-05-12 23:54 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-12 01:08 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 09:27 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-12 05:41 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 13:22 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-12 07:22 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-12 14:58 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-12 09:23 -0700
Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 22:59 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-13 11:07 +1200
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 23:17 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-13 11:20 +1200
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 23:30 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-13 11:34 +1200
Re: Non-constant initializers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-12 16:52 -0700
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-14 00:13 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers kym@kymhorsell.com - 2011-05-14 01:54 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Columbus sailed the ocean China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-14 01:07 -0700
Re: Non-constant initializers kym@kymhorsell.com - 2011-05-14 09:22 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-14 17:14 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-14 00:11 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Columbus sailed the ocean China Blue <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-12 16:15 -0700
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-12 23:28 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-05-12 18:01 -0600
Re: Non-constant initializers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-12 18:15 -0700
Re: Non-constant initializers Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-05-12 22:56 -0600
Re: Non-constant initializers Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-05-13 05:18 +0000
Re: Non-constant initializers Fred the Freshwater Catfish <usenet.fred@bdtd.invalid> - 2011-05-13 23:57 +0000
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-12 20:20 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 09:48 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-13 12:55 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 11:25 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-13 08:57 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 16:42 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-13 13:17 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-13 21:03 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-14 06:43 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-14 06:55 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-17 12:59 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-17 12:44 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-17 14:07 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-17 17:20 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-17 15:03 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-14 08:43 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-14 09:17 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-14 09:04 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 17:00 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 16:58 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-14 19:07 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-15 09:40 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-16 11:05 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-16 06:44 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2011-05-19 20:17 +0000
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-19 15:20 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-19 18:51 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Petter Gustad <newsmailcomp6@gustad.com> - 2011-05-20 08:01 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-20 15:09 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-20 08:54 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-23 11:11 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2011-05-23 18:20 -0400
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-06-03 08:21 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-19 13:31 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-16 09:05 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-05-16 22:37 +0200
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-18 23:16 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring ChrisQ <meru@devnull.com> - 2011-05-17 17:10 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-17 17:27 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring ChrisQ <meru@devnull.com> - 2011-05-17 23:08 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom <tggzzz@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-17 22:37 +0000
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-18 09:25 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-18 06:25 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-18 14:06 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-05-18 19:23 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-18 13:48 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2011-05-19 00:29 +0000
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Ken Hagan" <k.hagan@thermoteknix.com> - 2011-05-19 13:12 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-18 23:27 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-05-19 15:19 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-05-20 07:33 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-16 03:14 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-16 10:43 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-16 04:58 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-16 12:40 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2011-05-15 10:12 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 13:22 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-15 09:02 +0100
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-14 14:02 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-12 20:18 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> - 2011-05-09 14:32 -0700
Re: Computer arithmetic problems worth exploring "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-05-09 16:08 -0700
csiph-web