Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch > #1374 > unrolled thread
| Started by | George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-05-07 03:06 -0400 |
| Last post | 2011-05-09 16:08 -0700 |
| Articles | 4 on this page of 124 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
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
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
| From | "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-14 14:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4DCEEDDA.6050504@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| In reply to | #1529 |
On 5/13/2011 1:48 AM, nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > Andy \"Krazy\" Glew<andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote: >> As you may have noticed, I immediately jump to polar coordinates for >> directed infinities. > > Fine. Good luck in getting programming languages to follow you! Who needs programming language support? I have my own C++ template class, that supports rectangular and polar notation. (Actually, had - it appears that is one of the things left behind at some former employer, probably Intel. They probably wouldn't have minding me taking it. But, it is fairly simple to rewrite from scatch if the need arises.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-12 20:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4DCCA2EC.3060708@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| In reply to | #1482 |
On 5/11/2011 10:08 PM, George Neuner wrote: > On Mon, 09 May 2011 13:55:27 -0700, "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" > <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> wrote: > The computing world has shifted to where the vast majority of > programmers are stunned by results that don't match the basic > arithmetic they learned in school. And there are precious few > resources to which they can turn for answers. There are a few good > papers like Goldberg's, but those that attempt to explain the issues > assume some knowledge of calculus from the reader. > [snip] > > I'm not really an advocate of software decimal FP although I do think > it is the only real choice for exacting arithmetic right now. I'm not > terribly thrilled with decimal FP (754-2008) either - it represents > even fewer numbers exactly than does binary FP. Wider formats (binary > or decimal) with greater precision help but just push back the issue > of exactness and consume ever larger amounts of chip real estate to do > so. It would be better if the same number of bits could represent a > larger set of exact numbers. Hmmm... Maybe what naive programmers want is decimal FP. Where they can at least be made to understand the rounding errors in a notation they understand.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-09 14:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dc5483f0-c0aa-4afc-a2ac-8ef6d20c1618@m10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #1405 |
On May 9, 2:14 pm, George Neuner <gneun...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Forget numerical analysis - most students in the US never take > calculus. Many colleges don't require any more than 2 algebra courses > to get a non-math liberal arts degree. Even business majors typically > only need add a statistics course. Unless the person went to a top > tier school or was ambitiously taking electives, the odds are low that > a liberal arts major will have had any higher maths. > While I was in graduate school and still relatively contemptuous of doing science with computers, I argued that, far from freeing us from the necessity of understanding analysis (which would encompass numerical analysis), computers would require us to work even harder to understand mathematical subtleties. It's true that, if you replace flintlock rifles with assault rifles, you can kill people with a much higher level of efficiency and a much lower level of training and competence. It is also true that you can make catastrophic mistakes much faster and with very little forethought. That's roughly the situation we are in now. We have handed the mathematical equivalent of assault rifles to absolute boobs. Much as I respect Andy's good intentions, trying to fix profound mathematical naivete with hardware sounds like a losing proposition to me. Robert.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-05-09 16:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4DC873E5.6000600@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| In reply to | #1411 |
On 5/9/2011 2:32 PM, Robert Myers wrote: > On May 9, 2:14 pm, George Neuner<gneun...@comcast.net> wrote: > That's roughly the situation we are in now. We have handed the > mathematical equivalent of assault rifles to absolute boobs. Much as > I respect Andy's good intentions, trying to fix profound mathematical > naivete with hardware sounds like a losing proposition to me. > > Robert. Nah. Fast computers are to slow computers what assault rifles are to muskets. IEEE FP is just the rifling inside the barrel bore.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch
csiph-web