Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> At 10:14 AM 1/2/01 +, David Mitchell wrote:
> >Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > > BigFloat could well build on BigInt for its "mantissa" and have another
> > > int-of-some-kind as its exponent. We don't need to pack it tightly
> > > so we should probably
> An OS problem and a build environment (cross-compilation, yuk)
> problem. I once managed to compile miniperl (5.005) for Chorus.
> I'm about to unearth the cross-compilation changes I had to make to
> get that working. (You thought Configure was hairy enough already?
> Think again: the test ex
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 12:34 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> >If you want to experiment with modifying perl5's bigints and bigfloats
> >with a tuned library to get an idea of how much speed we're talking about,
> >gmp is probably the best bet to get a good estimate
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> No, I don't think so. In this case, the natural word size really
DS> is 16 bits, regardless of what's transparent to the
DS> programmer. (Just as 32-bit integers seem fastest for many things
DS> on Alphas, despite the fact that it
At 12:58 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DS> At 12:43 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> >>
> >> which OS? rt-11 was my favorite!
>
> DS> RSTS/E, of course. If for no other reason than I've never used
> DS> RT-11 or RSX.
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> At 12:43 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
>>
>> which OS? rt-11 was my favorite!
DS> RSTS/E, of course. If for no other reason than I've never used
DS> RT-11 or RSX. (Well, unless you count VMS in as an RSX variant...)
DS
At 12:34 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>If you want to experiment with modifying perl5's bigints and bigfloats
>with a tuned library to get an idea of how much speed we're talking about,
>gmp is probably the best bet to get a good estimate with the least amount
>of effort (though it doesn
At 12:43 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DS> sure I could do it on a PDP-11, with it's 64Kwords of I&D
> DS> space. Probably not the baseline, all-C version of the source, but
> DS> perl nonetheless.
>
>that would warm the nost
At 12:41 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DS> I was thinking of chips like the 68008, which had a 16-bit data
> DS> bus. While the native word size was 32 bits, fetching one took two
> DS> trips out to memory. Done automagically
> "JH" == Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JH> None right now but then again it's my early morning precoffee
JH> brain... Are there any places with 32b ints and 16b ptrs? If so,
JH> casting ints to pointers and back would be even more debatable
JH> than usual.
having b
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> sure I could do it on a PDP-11, with it's 64Kwords of I&D
DS> space. Probably not the baseline, all-C version of the source, but
DS> perl nonetheless.
that would warm the nostalgic cockles of my heart. :)
which OS? rt-11 was my fa
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> I was thinking of chips like the 68008, which had a 16-bit data
DS> bus. While the native word size was 32 bits, fetching one took two
DS> trips out to memory. Done automagically for you by the chip's
DS> circuitry so you didn't h
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > >Anyone know of a good bigint/bigfloat library whose terms are such that we
> > >can just snag the source and use it in perl?
> There's a clone of the GPL one that was written specifically to avoid GPL
> issues. I'll try to dig up more references
> >None right now but then again it's my early morning precoffee brain...
> >Are there any places with 32b ints and 16b ptrs? If so, casting ints
> >to pointers and back would be even more debatable than usual.
>
> I'm going to try really hard to avoid that particular pitfall, if for no
> other
At 07:33 AM 1/2/01 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 07:26:39AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 01:10 PM 12/31/00 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > > but you seem to agree that porting to most embedded type systems is
> more
> > > > of an OS (and testing!) issue than
At 09:42 AM 1/2/01 -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > that got wedged into an 8K address space with overlays...) but I'm pretty
> > sure I could do it on a PDP-11, with it's 64Kwords of I&D space. Probably
> > not the baseline, all-C version of the source,
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> that got wedged into an 8K address space with overlays...) but I'm pretty
> sure I could do it on a PDP-11, with it's 64Kwords of I&D space. Probably
> not the baseline, all-C version of the source, but perl nonetheless.
Oh, then perhaps we should put
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 07:26:39AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 01:10 PM 12/31/00 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > but you seem to agree that porting to most embedded type systems is more
> > > of an OS (and testing!) issue than compilation. if other complex enough
> >
> >I think there are
At 12:13 PM 12/31/00 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > Yeak, I know a lot of the old 8 and 16 bit chips are in use as control
> > devices places. Those are the ones I'm thinking about. (Not that hard, but
> > I don't want to rule them out needlessly)
>
>Yeah! I want to dust off my trusty old Z8
At 01:10 PM 12/31/00 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > but you seem to agree that porting to most embedded type systems is more
> > of an OS (and testing!) issue than compilation. if other complex enough
>
>I think there are true limits imposed by the more limited CPUs like
>address space. I th
At 10:14 AM 1/2/01 +, David Mitchell wrote:
>Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > BigFloat could well build on BigInt for its "mantissa" and have another
> > int-of-some-kind as its exponent. We don't need to pack it tightly
> > so we should probably avoid IEEE-like hidden MSB. The s
At 11:58 PM 1/1/01 +, Tom Hughes wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > At 09:48 PM 12/30/00 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
> >
> > >ARM7/ARM9 are both 32-bit
> > >MIPS has both 32-bit and 64-bit variants.
> >
> > That's good. Though do
Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> BigFloat could well build on BigInt for its "mantissa" and have another
> int-of-some-kind as its exponent. We don't need to pack it tightly
> so we should probably avoid IEEE-like hidden MSB. The size of exponent
> is one area where "known range of in
23 matches
Mail list logo
