Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #3328

Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem!

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

jmfbahciv wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> jmfbahciv wrote
>>> Andy "Krazy" Glew wrote
>>>> jmfbahciv wrote
>>>>> Andy "Krazy" Glew wrote
>>>>>> nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote
>>>>>>> Andy \"Krazy\" Glew<andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote
>>>>>>>> Terje Mathisen wrote

>>>>>> I am collecting these against the next time I am involved in an
>>>>>> effort like MMX.  Where shortsighted people will say "all we need
>>>>>> to support is 4:2:2 YUV, and we should add a special instruction
>>>>>> just for that", rather than more general support.  Or vice versa.

>>>>> Please consider putting your collections on bitsavers,
>>>>> or somewhere, so that the knowledge doesn't get lost.

>>>> I am putting my collection on comp-arch.net --- my own personal
>>>> wikipedia.  I had not considered it as Bitsavers, but fair enough.

>>> Not wiki.   Definitely not wiki.  I don't care where as long as all
>>> your tradeoffs, which is the most important piece of designing
>>> but never gets published.  In our biz, our mistakes and initial
>>> desing reasonings rarely got put down on paper.

>>>> Why "my own personal" - well, I started putting it on wikipedia,
>>>> but got tired of stuff being deleted by the wikipedia trolls.

>>> I have yet to believe anything on wiki.

>> More fool you.

>>> I think of it as a non-feature and eventually dangerous.

>> More fool you.

>>>> Why not "bitsavers"?  Well, my impression is that bitsavers is
>>>> about saving manuals, etc.

>>> Well, I don't care where as long as the thinking processes oof those
>>> designs are preserved.  :-)  Making computers represent numbers
>>> and do mere arithmetic is hard and most people, even those who
>>> become bit gods in other areas, have no idea about the problems.
>>> Training new people to design these things is in the startosphere
>>> of techniques, IMO.  Every kiddie is going to have a wonderful
>>> idea and won't discover the pitfalls until too late.

>> Kiddies dont design computers.

> They do.

Not anymore.

> Getting it to market requires experience.

There arent any done by kiddies anymore. 

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-08-30 13:32 +0000
  Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-30 07:02 -0700
    Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-08-30 17:09 +0200
    Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-08-31 13:21 +0000
      Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-31 07:55 -0700
        Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-01 13:39 +0000
          Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-02 01:24 +1000
          Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-09-01 08:28 -0700
            Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-02 13:44 +0000
      Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-01 04:30 +1000
        Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-01 13:39 +0000
          Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-02 01:26 +1000

csiph-web