Torbjorn Granlund t...@gmplib.org writes:
We might want to re-phrase it somewhat, perhaps just consider -
seriously consider, or even New projects should use mpfr since mpf is
slower, less complete, and not actively developed.
I guess in theory, mpf could be slightly faster than mpfr since
On 2013-10-24 10:01:32 +0200, Marc Glisse wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013, Niels Möller wrote:
I guess in theory, mpf could be slightly faster than mpfr since mpf
doesn't make any effort to have precisely defined rounding.
In that case I think it would be preferable to introduce a new don't care
Dear Developers,
I like using GMP in my research and the main drawback of current library
is a very limited set of float functions. I see that implementing these
is listed in developing plans.
I have developed a set of following functions and I would like to share
code with you and (if
Użytkownik Marc Glisse napisał:
r sharing. Are you aware of the MPFR library? GMP's mpf_t type
is a legacy type and we recommend people use MPFR for new projects. And
if you are aware of it, how does your code compare, and what are the
main motivations for sticking with mpf_t?
I know about
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013, Lukasz Komsta wrote:
I know about MPFR and noticed some time ago that it contains such
functions, but I have not tested this library as I had no time to switch
my codes to it. However, I will do it soon.
I developed my functions during several long evenings to deal with
Marc Glisse marc.gli...@inria.fr writes:
On the homepage gmplib.org:
Externally supported: High-level floating-point accurately rounding
arithmetic functions (mpfr). See the mpfr site for more
information. Starting with GMP 4.2, mpfr is released separately from
GMP. (New projects should