Kaveh == Kaveh R GHAZI [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kaveh I'm doing this at the tree level, so AIUI I have to be mindful of type,
Kaveh scope and conflicts. I also have to decide what to do in non-C.
There's nothing to do here for Java -- Java code can't access lgamma.
Not to be too negative (I
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Tom Tromey wrote:
Not to be too negative (I am curious about this), but does this sort of
optimization really carry its own weight? Is this a common thing in
numeric code or something like that?
Tom
I don't know that optimizing lgamma by itself makes a big difference.
On 25 April 2007 18:55, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
I'd like to work on using MPFR to handle builtin lgamma.
In what sense is it a builtin if it requires a library to be installed and
emits a call to a library function ??? I may not have understood what you're
trying to do here, but how would it
Dave Korn wrote:
On 25 April 2007 18:55, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
I'd like to work on using MPFR to handle builtin lgamma.
In what sense is it a builtin if it requires a library to be installed and
emits a call to a library function ??? I may not have understood what you're
trying to do
On 26 April 2007 16:26, Brian Dessent wrote:
Dave Korn wrote:
On 25 April 2007 18:55, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
I'd like to work on using MPFR to handle builtin lgamma.
In what sense is it a builtin if it requires a library to be installed
and emits a call to a library function ??? I
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Dave Korn wrote:
On 26 April 2007 16:26, Brian Dessent wrote:
The builtin would run on the host at compile time, whereas the above
would run on the target at runtime. I presume he's talking about using
MPFR in the host compiler to simplify lgamma(constant), not
