On 3 October 2011 15:28, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@st.com> wrote: > Indeed, the result is known to be always positive.
> - val = ((val64 >> 63) & 0x80000000) > - | ((result_exp & 0xff) << 23) > + val = ((result_exp & 0xff) << 23) > | ((val64 >> 29) & 0x7fffff); > return make_float32(val); So we weren't generating incorrect results, we were just doing slightly more work than we really needed, right? I'm curious what prompted this patch :-) -- PMM
