On Friday, 18 December 2015 at 07:30:52 UTC, drug wrote:
What I mean about order of operations is that if you go
a = b*a+c*c + e;
the compiler is free to rewrite that as
float __tmp0 = a*b;
float __tmp1 = c*c;
and then do either of
float __tmp2 = __tmp0+__tmp1;
a = __tmp2 + e;
OR
float __tmp2
On 12/18/2015 12:19 AM, Ola Fosheim Gr wrote:
On Friday, 18 December 2015 at 07:30:52 UTC, drug wrote:
What I mean about order of operations is that if you go
a = b*a+c*c + e;
the compiler is free to rewrite that as
float __tmp0 = a*b;
float __tmp1 = c*c;
and then do either of
float __tmp2 =
On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 11:58:35 UTC, drug wrote:
On 17.12.2015 14:52, Andrea Fontana wrote:
You should publish some code to check...
Too much code to public - operations are simple, but there are
many branches and reducing may take much time . In fact I asked
to understand _in
On 17.12.2015 16:09, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
Yes the float types are the same. floats doubles are identical long
double == real ( at least for x86)
The only difference is that float are default initialised to NaN in D.
The sources of difference are likely to occur from
- const folding (varying
On 17.12.2015 12:50, drug wrote:
I have two implementation of the same algorithm - D and C++ (that is
port of D version). I assume that running these implementations on the
same data should give the same results from both. But with some data the
results differ (5th decimal digit after point).
On 12/17/2015 03:50 AM, drug wrote:
> D and C++ [...] But with some data the results differ
You may have similar results between two C and two C++ compilers, even
between two different versions of the same compiler.
In addition to possible reasons that has already been mentioned, note
that
On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 11:50:02 UTC, drug wrote:
I have two implementation of the same algorithm - D and C++
(that is port of D version). I assume that running these
implementations on the same data should give the same results
from both. But with some data the results differ (5th
On 18.12.2015 05:58, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 13:30:11 UTC, drug wrote:
On 17.12.2015 16:09, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
[...]
Thanks for answer. My C++ version is tracing D version so
commutativity and distributivity aren't requred because order of
operations is the
On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 13:30:11 UTC, drug wrote:
On 17.12.2015 16:09, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
[...]
Thanks for answer. My C++ version is tracing D version so
commutativity and distributivity aren't requred because order
of operations is the same (I guess so at least), so I hoped for
I have two implementation of the same algorithm - D and C++ (that is
port of D version). I assume that running these implementations on the
same data should give the same results from both. But with some data the
results differ (5th decimal digit after point). For my purpose it isn't
important
On 17.12.2015 14:52, Andrea Fontana wrote:
You should publish some code to check...
Too much code to public - operations are simple, but there are many
branches and reducing may take much time . In fact I asked to understand
_in general_ if it worth diving into code to find the source of the
11 matches
Mail list logo
