Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #2338
| From | "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: 64 bit code |
| Date | 2012-10-13 13:11 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <k5blp3$3fj$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <k54j49$cns$1@speranza.aioe.org> <162dnU-Rw5IpVOrNnZ2dnUVZ8qCdnZ2d@bt.com> <k59snb$oqm$1@speranza.aioe.org> <k59un2$qem$1@dont-email.me> <k5beod$t0h$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
"Rui Maciel" <rui.maciel@gmail.com> wrote in message news:k5beod$t0h$1@speranza.aioe.org... > BartC wrote: > >> I didn't understand any of your argument. Using more precision is always >> going to help some types of calculations. > > Some, not all. And if we really look into it, probably not most, at least > in a meaningful way. > Finally, when we factor in the performance penalty associated with using > higher precision types, the irrelevant effect on precision factored with > the > higher computational cost does show that picking a higher precision > floating > point type can and does pose a problem. If the hardware can directly deal with 64-bit floats, then there is little performance loss (compared with attempting 64-bit arithmetic on 32-bit hardware, or in software). The only issue might be memory bandwidth when dealing with large numbers of floating point values, although if they are accessed mainly for calculation, then it's possible the calculation will dominate the timings. Anyway, I remember using 32-bit floats in an application (originally using software emulation), and they weren't of sufficient accuracy for some types of problems (mapping for example). They only have 1 in 8 million precision after all. Switching to 64-bits solved that problem. Sometimes there are ways to get around such problems, and continue using 32-bits, but sometimes also it's simpler to just use 64! -- Bartc
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
64 bit code bob <bob@coolfone.comze.com> - 2012-10-10 08:22 -0700
Re: 64 bit code Jongware <jongware@no-spam.plz> - 2012-10-10 17:35 +0200
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-10 17:37 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-10-10 12:54 -0500
Re: 64 bit code Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201210.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-10-10 21:37 +0200
Re: 64 bit code BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-10 21:46 -0500
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-10 20:43 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2012-10-12 08:40 +0100
Re: 64 bit code BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-12 12:36 -0500
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-12 20:57 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-12 21:30 +0100
Re: 64 bit code BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-12 16:33 -0500
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-13 00:44 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-10-12 20:07 -0700
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-13 11:11 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-13 13:11 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Willem <willem@turtle.stack.nl> - 2012-10-13 12:34 +0000
Re: 64 bit code BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-13 09:50 -0500
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-13 17:25 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-13 17:53 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-13 17:05 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-13 10:37 +0200
Re: 64 bit code "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2012-10-27 12:18 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2012-10-27 12:54 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-27 15:13 +0200
Re: 64 bit code Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-10-28 04:12 -0500
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-28 13:10 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> - 2012-10-29 04:38 +0000
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-29 09:30 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> - 2012-10-30 22:09 +0000
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-31 09:47 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-31 09:55 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> - 2012-10-31 14:32 +0000
Re: 64 bit code Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-10-27 08:51 -0700
Re: 64 bit code "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> - 2012-10-27 17:23 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-27 20:43 +0200
Re: 64 bit code "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> - 2012-10-30 22:16 +0000
Re: 64 bit code "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> - 2012-10-31 09:53 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "LudovicoVan" <julio@diegidio.name> - 2012-10-31 14:33 +0000
Re: 64 bit code Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201211.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-11-01 00:25 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-10 21:04 +0100
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-10 21:52 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-11 10:50 +1300
Re: 64 bit code BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-10 21:54 -0500
Re: 64 bit code "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-10-11 13:11 +0100
Re: 64 bit code BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-10-11 11:17 -0500
Re: 64 bit code Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-10-10 13:17 -0700
Re: 64 bit code Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201210.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2012-10-11 19:36 +0200
Re: 64 bit code Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-10-12 08:13 -0700
Re: 64 bit code Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-10-10 20:38 +0100
Re: 64 bit code Robin Vowels <robin.vowels@gmail.com> - 2012-10-10 15:22 -0700
Re: 64 bit code Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-10-12 02:13 -0500
csiph-web