On 22/03/16 23:31, Ian Romanick wrote:
On 03/17/2016 09:18 AM, Martin Peres wrote:
On 16/03/16 19:33, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
The SIN and COS instructions on Intel hardware can produce values
slightly outside of the [-1.0, 1.0] range for a small set of values.
Obviously, this can break
On Tuesday, March 22, 2016 2:31:42 PM PDT Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 03/17/2016 09:18 AM, Martin Peres wrote:
> > On 16/03/16 19:33, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> >> The SIN and COS instructions on Intel hardware can produce values
> >> slightly outside of the [-1.0, 1.0] range for a small set of values.
On 03/17/2016 09:18 AM, Martin Peres wrote:
> On 16/03/16 19:33, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
>> The SIN and COS instructions on Intel hardware can produce values
>> slightly outside of the [-1.0, 1.0] range for a small set of values.
>> Obviously, this can break everyone's expectations about trig
The SIN and COS instructions on Intel hardware can produce values
slightly outside of the [-1.0, 1.0] range for a small set of values.
Obviously, this can break everyone's expectations about trig functions.
According to an internal presentation, the COS instruction can produce
a value up to
On Thursday, March 17, 2016 6:18:39 PM PDT Martin Peres wrote:
> On 16/03/16 19:33, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> > The SIN and COS instructions on Intel hardware can produce values
> > slightly outside of the [-1.0, 1.0] range for a small set of values.
> > Obviously, this can break everyone's
On 16/03/16 19:33, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
The SIN and COS instructions on Intel hardware can produce values
slightly outside of the [-1.0, 1.0] range for a small set of values.
Obviously, this can break everyone's expectations about trig functions.
According to an internal presentation, the COS
