I am programming the most repetitive stuff (except for the part where I 
copy/paste into julia to use her parsing algs and then recopy) in Maple -- 
eventually it would be good to be able to, in the special cases where it is 
helpful, macro-gobble whatever is on the line and then pass it along. 
 munchymacro?  And that should fall out nicely from far more substantial 
evolution. Whenever.

Re correct rounding:  if by correct you mean there is no result that more 
than 0.5ulp from the ideal result -- no. For that, crlibm is the play for 
Float64 results. Should someone *("not it")* reimplement crlib in Julia and 
parameterize the working float type, my stuff would just work, and maybe 
crlibm takes care of the correct rounding.  I am trying to have everything 
be correct up through the penultimate nibble of the extended significand -- 
at least 102 reliable bits for non-outlandish function calls.  The 
restriction is throughput.  An earlier version usually had the last bit 
correct, but it ran slower than BigFloat so I changed my approach.



 





On Monday, November 2, 2015 at 9:07:28 AM UTC-5, David P. Sanders wrote:
>
>
>
> El lunes, 2 de noviembre de 2015, 7:58:17 (UTC-6), Stefan Karpinski 
> escribió:
>>
>> I think we should probably make it possible to access the full string of 
>> a numeric literal in a macro but that is a substantial change to the parser.
>>
>
> That would be great.
>
> Off-topic: Jeffrey, will your Float128 library be correctly-rounded?
>  
>
>>
>> On Monday, November 2, 2015, David P. Sanders <dpsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> El lunes, 2 de noviembre de 2015, 6:35:46 (UTC-6), Milan Bouchet-Valat 
>>> escribió:
>>>>
>>>> Le lundi 02 novembre 2015 à 00:58 -0800, Jeffrey Sarnoff a écrit : 
>>>> > I have many values like 
>>>> >  0.6584871727288045313850172023417636020375045372547107712468813403 
>>>> > that come from Maple and I would like to avoid doing this by 
>>>> > copy/paste for each one: 
>>>> > Float128(parse(BigFloat,"0.658487172728804531385017202341763602037504 
>>>> > 5372547107712468813403")) 
>>>> > 
>>>> > I tried writing a macro that would put quotes around the value and 
>>>> > then affix the rest -- without good result. 
>>>> > julia>@fromMaple 
>>>> > 0.6584871727288045313850172023417636020375045372547107712468813403 
>>>> > Float128(parse(BigFloat,"0.658487172728804531385017202341763602037504 
>>>> > 5372547107712468813403")) 
>>>> > 
>>>> > The REPL converts  the unenquoted value to a Float64 before I get at 
>>>> > it. 
>>>> > 
>>>> > Help is appreciated. 
>>>> I don't think you can work around this at the moment. The best you can 
>>>> do is to define a non-standard string literal by creating a @f128_str 
>>>> macro, so that you can type these numbers as 
>>>> f128"0.6584871727288045313850172023417636020375045372547107712468813403 
>>>> ". 
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is already a `big` macro:
>>>
>>> Float128(big"0.65848717272880453138501720234176360203750453725471077124688134")
>>>
>>> Instead of copying and pasting in the REPL, couldn't you write these 
>>> numbers to a file
>>> and read them in as strings in Julia?
>>>  
>>> There has been some discussion in the past about forwarding strings like 
>>> this to the parser
>>> already wrapped in a macro (as is done for large integer values); I 
>>> don't recall what the 
>>> issue with this was.
>>>
>>

Reply via email to