X-pop3-spooler: POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 3 961213 -bs- Delivered-To: pcg AT goof DOT com Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 17:02:59 +0200 (EET) From: Tuukka Toivonen X-Sender: tuukkat AT stekt10 Reply-To: Tuukka Toivonen To: Thomas Koehler cc: beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl Subject: Re: paranoia & extra precision [was -fno-float-store in pgcc] In-Reply-To: <35094C21.6B3F0566@pfh.research.philips.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: Marc Lehmann Status: RO Content-Length: 1259 Lines: 26 On Fri, 13 Mar 1998, Thomas Koehler wrote: >so what is the difference between the behaviour of programs compiled >with -ffloat-store compared to setting the FPU-rounding mode to double >via __setfpucw? (except that the -ffloat-store variante is much slower). - Even at low precision the numbers in FPU may have much bigger/smaller exponent than numbers that are kept in double memory variables. I don't know if this violates IEEE (specs cost almost $100 :( ) - If you mix lot of both double and float, the FPU control word has to be set every time. Also, if the state of the CW is unknown (like calling a library routine) it has to be set. So using low precision may be actually slower than using -ffloat-store. GCC could prepare the needed control words into memory at the beginning of a program, so that only single fldcw instruction would be needed to switch to a another precision mode. Unfortunately this would interfere if user would also change CW. -- | Tuukka Toivonen [PGP public key | Homepage: http://www.ee.oulu.fi/~tuukkat/ available] | Try also finger -l tuukkat AT ee DOT oulu DOT fi | Studying information engineering at the University of Oulu +-----------------------------------------------------------