Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Message-ID | <4F924908.6040908@SPAM.comp-arch.net> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-04-20 22:43 -0700 |
| From | "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> |
| Organization | comp-arch.net |
| Newsgroups | comp.arch |
| Subject | Re: Indirect Bit |
| References | (2 earlier) <jmhor8$7pi$1@needham.csi.cam.ac.uk> <b992445b-d51c-4c5b-acb2-2ffcd5b4e7db@t7g2000pbp.googlegroups.com> <jmon4p$u8k$1@needham.csi.cam.ac.uk> <16603280.18.1334860198726.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynnf1> <1Bikr.12248$mL3.10431@newsfe23.iad> |
On 4/20/2012 12:14 PM, EricP wrote:
> MitchAlsup wrote:
>>
>> For todays lesson in FP optimizations: consider the following::
>>
>> x = 3.0/7.0
>> if( x == 3.0/7.0 ) blah();
>>
>> A) Is it legal for the optimizer to compute the 3.0/7.0 for the
>> assignment statement at compile time?
>> B) is it legal for the optimizer to compile the 3.0/7.0 for the
>> if-statement at compile time?
>> C) is it legal for the optimizer to dead-code-eliminate the if-
>> statement leaving only the call to blah() ?
>>
>> {Leaving out the falacy of EVER comparing FP numbers for exactness}
>>
>> Answers:
>> A) yes
>> B) no
>> C) no
>>
>> This snippet of code is designed to determine if arithmetic operations
>> are carried out with more precision in registers than is store in memory.
>> For machines that have more precision in regsiters than in memory, blah
>> is never called.
>>
>> Mitch
>
> Isn't this occurring because of silent type conversions,
> and perhaps indicative of a compiler bug?
>
> It seems to me that if the compiler supported and
> x was declared long double (80 bit float),
> and 3.0 and 7.0 were converted to long double type,
> and any intermediate values that had to be spilled
> from registers were saved as long doubles,
> that it would all work as expected (A=yes, B=yes, C=yes).
>
> The weirdness is because there is a silent conversion to
> double (64 bits) on save, then back to long double on load.
>
> In other words, its not the extended precision that is the problem,
> rather an inappropriate usage of it.
>
> Or is something else afoot?
>
> Eric
The problem was that on the old x87 floating point, there were always
silent type conversions.
Normally all operations were done in 80 bit precision, and converted
to/from 32 or 64 only when moved to/from memory.
Now, x87 has a precision control, PC, with can be set so that the
register operations were 32 or 64 bit rather than 80 bit. But (1) PC is
slow to change, and (2) PC only affected mantissa bits, not exponent.
So, no matter what, there was a silent type conversion, to a register
type with the same number of mantissa bits, but more exponent bits.
Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Indirect Bit Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-04-10 19:31 -0800
Re: Indirect Bit Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-11 01:29 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit sarr.blumson@alum.dartmouth.org - 2012-04-11 14:48 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2012-04-12 14:43 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2012-04-22 15:19 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-22 23:24 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-11 08:32 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-11 05:49 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 21:22 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-13 08:14 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-13 16:13 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-13 20:01 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Andrew Reilly <areilly.---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-04-14 03:16 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-14 08:14 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-13 16:05 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-13 17:01 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-14 13:49 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-13 20:07 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-14 18:47 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2012-04-22 15:26 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-22 23:25 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-23 09:18 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-04-23 19:35 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-24 08:37 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-24 09:42 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-24 01:58 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-24 11:26 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-24 05:02 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-24 13:58 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-24 10:07 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-24 04:30 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-24 13:01 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2012-04-11 10:03 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2012-04-11 09:22 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-12 14:11 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2012-04-12 18:05 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 20:13 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Mark Thorson <nospam@sonic.net> - 2012-04-12 16:55 -0800
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-12 17:25 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-12 20:03 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 21:33 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-13 15:57 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-13 17:03 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 20:14 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-11 10:35 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-11 08:54 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 07:55 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-12 10:16 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-12 11:07 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 21:34 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-04-12 11:35 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 21:41 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-13 14:52 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-04-15 09:24 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-15 22:45 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-04-15 18:04 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-12 21:12 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-12 19:23 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-13 08:54 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-14 14:37 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Andrew Reilly <areilly.---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-04-15 23:42 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-16 08:08 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Andrew Reilly <areilly.---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-04-16 23:38 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-16 21:29 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-16 21:25 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-12 14:05 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-14 10:12 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-14 06:25 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-14 14:50 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit ChrisQ <blackhole@devnull.com> - 2012-04-14 18:01 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-14 14:00 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-14 20:58 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-16 09:57 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2012-04-20 23:19 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit "Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton@gmail.com> - 2012-04-16 08:50 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-16 18:09 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Andrew Reilly <areilly.---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-04-16 23:19 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-17 09:20 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-17 12:49 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Andrew Reilly <areilly.---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-04-17 12:40 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-18 12:01 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-04-17 12:34 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-17 09:10 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Andrew Reilly <areilly.---@bigpond.net.au> - 2012-04-17 22:05 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-19 19:37 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit torbenm@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) - 2012-04-20 11:10 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-20 11:24 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-20 15:01 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-20 15:03 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-20 08:01 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-20 16:35 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-18 11:10 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-18 15:37 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-16 11:21 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-16 19:36 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-18 11:17 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-18 15:33 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Andreas Eder <andreas_eder@gmx.net> - 2012-04-19 00:29 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-19 10:50 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-19 11:29 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-19 21:39 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-04-20 15:14 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit "Andy (Super) Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2012-04-20 22:43 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-04-21 17:14 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-21 19:47 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-22 10:45 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-22 09:57 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-22 12:54 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-22 13:00 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-22 13:28 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-22 13:04 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201204.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-04-22 23:00 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-22 18:05 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-22 23:20 +0000
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-23 08:22 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-22 03:56 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit EricP <ThatWouldBeTelling@thevillage.com> - 2012-04-22 12:28 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-22 12:56 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-22 13:15 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-04-22 22:30 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-22 21:40 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-22 17:15 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-23 08:26 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2012-04-23 08:02 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-23 17:02 +0100
Re: Indirect Bit Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201204.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-04-23 20:17 +0200
Re: Indirect Bit Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-23 13:07 -0500
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-22 13:16 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-23 13:14 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2012-04-23 16:51 -0400
Re: Indirect Bit Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2012-04-23 14:22 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-21 11:17 -0700
Re: Indirect Bit jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-04-14 08:02 -0700
csiph-web