Message-ID: <3B0A09EC.3EB10991@acm.org> From: Eric Sosman 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> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 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