public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: craig@jcb-sc.com
To: slouken@devolution.com, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
Cc: craig@jcb-sc.com
Subject: Re: Rounding errors using doubles?
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 09:43:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19990319172911.17684.qmail@deer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: < E10O2lP-0006t2-00@roboto.devolution.com > (message from SamLantinga on Fri, 19 Mar 1999 09:08:51 -0800)

>If this doesn't work on other x86 CPUs, I'd like to know.
>Linux saves and restores the FPU flags on context switch, so this is
>safe to call in an individual program.

I've seen that kind of solution recommended before, and most/all
people who've used it seem to be happy with it.

The reason I don't like it as a general solution is that we don't
really know whether's there's any low-level numerical code lurking
down there that *assumes* the FPU modes are set to 80 bits, and
won't work correctly otherwise.  It's therefore not a robust solution,
even though it might happen to be 100% effective.  Whereas, an
option that's like -ffloat-store but affects *all* intermediate
computations *would* be robust, even if not 100% effective (in that
code not compiled with that option would still use 80-bit computations).

>BTW, I am on the list. :)

That's good to know: people can ignore my earlier email then.

        tq vm, (burley)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: craig@jcb-sc.com
To: slouken@devolution.com, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
Cc: craig@jcb-sc.com
Subject: Re: Rounding errors using doubles?
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 23:46:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19990319172911.17684.qmail@deer> (raw)
Message-ID: <19990331234600.4S5pyO-f5OujIsjgmYGkHs8lsxEm_CYbLtZJPeC7mnk@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E10O2lP-0006t2-00@roboto.devolution.com>

>If this doesn't work on other x86 CPUs, I'd like to know.
>Linux saves and restores the FPU flags on context switch, so this is
>safe to call in an individual program.

I've seen that kind of solution recommended before, and most/all
people who've used it seem to be happy with it.

The reason I don't like it as a general solution is that we don't
really know whether's there's any low-level numerical code lurking
down there that *assumes* the FPU modes are set to 80 bits, and
won't work correctly otherwise.  It's therefore not a robust solution,
even though it might happen to be 100% effective.  Whereas, an
option that's like -ffloat-store but affects *all* intermediate
computations *would* be robust, even if not 100% effective (in that
code not compiled with that option would still use 80-bit computations).

>BTW, I am on the list. :)

That's good to know: people can ignore my earlier email then.

        tq vm, (burley)

  parent reply	other threads:[~1999-03-19  9:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1999-03-19  9:08 Sam Lantinga
     [not found] ` < E10O2lP-0006t2-00@roboto.devolution.com >
1999-03-19  9:43   ` craig [this message]
1999-03-31 23:46     ` craig
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Sam Lantinga
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1999-03-18 17:43 Ross Smith
     [not found] ` < 002d01be71aa$30d420e0$a8a11dcb@animal.ihug.co.nz >
1999-03-19  6:36   ` craig
     [not found]     ` < 19990319142042.16973.qmail@deer >
1999-03-19  6:36       ` craig
1999-03-31 23:46         ` craig
1999-03-31 23:46     ` craig
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Ross Smith
1999-03-18 16:45 Sam Lantinga
1999-03-18 16:54 ` Dima Volodin
1999-03-31 23:46   ` Dima Volodin
     [not found] ` < E10NnPU-0006Cc-00@roboto.devolution.com >
1999-03-18 16:57   ` David Edelsohn
1999-03-31 23:46     ` David Edelsohn
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Sam Lantinga
1999-03-18 15:41 Sam Lantinga
1999-03-18 15:54 ` Dima Volodin
1999-03-31 23:46   ` Dima Volodin
     [not found] ` < E10NmPs-0005mx-00@roboto.devolution.com >
1999-03-18 15:51   ` Sylvain Pion
1999-03-31 23:46     ` Sylvain Pion
1999-03-18 16:12   ` Joe Buck
     [not found]     ` < 199903190011.QAA11085@atrus.synopsys.com >
1999-03-18 16:25       ` Joe Buck
1999-03-31 23:46         ` Joe Buck
1999-03-31 23:46     ` Joe Buck
1999-03-31 23:46 ` Sam Lantinga

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=19990319172911.17684.qmail@deer \
    --to=craig@jcb-sc.com \
    --cc=egcs@egcs.cygnus.com \
    --cc=slouken@devolution.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).