Message-ID:	<3B0A09EC.3EB10991@acm.org>
From:	Eric Sosman <esosman AT acm DOT org>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Generating Exponents FAST!
References:	<0q9kgtgddkvj69od8094172vodtrpubgsh AT 4ax DOT com> <9edet9$hev$1 AT nets3 DOT rz DOT RWTH-Aachen DOT DE>
Lines:	25
Date:	Tue, 22 May 2001 11:37:25 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host:	12.78.200.130
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT worldnet DOT att DOT net
X-Trace:	bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 990531445 12.78.200.130 (Tue, 22 May 2001 11:37:25 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Tue, 22 May 2001 11:37:25 GMT
Organization:	AT&T Worldnet
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
> 
> Radical NetSurfer <radsmail AT juno DOT com> wrote:
> 
> >  pow(10, ep);  is one obvious approach
> 
> > Which requires the time and computational overhead of whatever
> > is involved in  pow() function....
> 
> ... which may easily be faster than anything you could come up with.
> Go figure before you make blind assumptions about the quality of
> library code --- you do have access to all the sources, so why not
> peek into them to check for yourself?
> 
> > IS THERE A MORE DIRECT ROUTE to generating 10 ^ ep?
> 
> Of course: e.g. to not generate them at all. Precompute a table of
> such values, if you really only need so few of them.

    Or for a computational approach, see Knuth "The Art of Computer
Programming, Volume II: Seminumerical Algorithms," section 4.6.3.

-- 
Eric Sosman
esosman AT acm DOT org

- Raw text -