On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Jason Moxham wrote:
>
> maybe , I would have to look it up , basically mulhi goes like this
>
> calculate mul_short (either basecase or divide and conquer)
> mul_short is like mul_high but with 2 extra digits calculated , these 2
> extra
> digits give enough info t
On Thursday 08 July 2010 16:00:46 Fredrik Johansson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Jason Moxham
wrote:
> > The mulhi and mullo are exact unlike the mulmid , we could do an
> > approximate
> > mulhi which would be marginally faster.
> >
> > Jason
>
> Yes, that would be very nice. I assume
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Jason Moxham wrote:
>
> The mulhi and mullo are exact unlike the mulmid , we could do an
> approximate
> mulhi which would be marginally faster.
>
> Jason
>
Yes, that would be very nice. I assume approximate mulhi would be give the
exact result +/- 1?
Fredrik
--
On Thursday 08 July 2010 08:26:02 Fredrik Johansson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Jason Moxham
wrote:
> > On Tuesday 06 July 2010 10:49:35 Bill Hart wrote:
> > > Frederick is working on mpz_mulhi, however one thing we *really* need
> > > (since the interesting case for his applications
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:36 PM, Jason Moxham wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 July 2010 10:49:35 Bill Hart wrote:
> > Frederick is working on mpz_mulhi, however one thing we *really* need
> > (since the interesting case for his applications is for a small number
> > of limbs) is an x86_64 assembly version
The important case is size n * size n to top n limbs, if I understand correctly.
But in the basecase, maybe it is just as easy to do n1 * n2 -> n1 high limbs ?
Bill.
On 7 July 2010 22:36, Jason Moxham wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 July 2010 10:49:35 Bill Hart wrote:
>> Frederick is working on mpz_mulh
On Tuesday 06 July 2010 10:49:35 Bill Hart wrote:
> Frederick is working on mpz_mulhi, however one thing we *really* need
> (since the interesting case for his applications is for a small number
> of limbs) is an x86_64 assembly version for the basecase, as at
> present I think we just use a full m
Frederick is working on mpz_mulhi, however one thing we *really* need
(since the interesting case for his applications is for a small number
of limbs) is an x86_64 assembly version for the basecase, as at
present I think we just use a full multiplication. I think this should
save a large percentage
On 5 July 2010 12:54, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
> Since Bill asked...
>
> * "short" integer multiplication
Do you mean mpz_mullo and mpz_mulhi? That would be an interesting
project. Of course we already have this at the mpn level, but much
more work could be done on this to make it better.
> * fm
