On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 6:28 AM, srinivasan srinivas
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Is thera any way for a program to choose between 32-bit or 64-bit dynamically?
Doubt it, since it's set in stone from when your CPython interpreter
got compiled.
There may be some workaround to use 32bit libs
Hi,
Is thera any way for a program to choose between 32-bit or 64-bit dynamically?
Thanks,
Srini
Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to
http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Jun 18, 10:00 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 18, 3:02 am, Phil Hobbs
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > That was suggested. Problem is, that sometimes the velocities are near
> > > zero. So this solution, by itself, is not general eno
On Jun 18, 3:02 am, Phil Hobbs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > That was suggested. Problem is, that sometimes the velocities are near
> > zero. So this solution, by itself, is not general enough.
>
> Are you sure? I sort of doubt that you're spending zillions of
> itera
On Jun 18, 7:12 pm, Peter Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:13:40 -0400, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [snip]
> >> I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> >> accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
> >>
On Jun 17, 5:04 pm, "Richard Brodie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >That was suggested. Problem is, that sometimes the velocities are near
> >zero. So this solution, by itself, is not general enough.
>
> Maybe working in p, and delt
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:13:40 -0400, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
>> I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
>> accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
>> attaining it. After approx. 680 seconds, Python gets stuck and tells
>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That was suggested. Problem is, that sometimes the velocities are near
zero. So this solution, by itself, is not general enough.
Are you sure? I sort of doubt that you're spending zillions of
iterations getting closer and closer to zero. It would be worth
actually
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>That was suggested. Problem is, that sometimes the velocities are near
>zero. So this solution, by itself, is not general enough.
Maybe working in p, and delta-p would be more stable.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pyth
On Jun 17, 3:13 pm, Phil Hobbs
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 7:43 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>> On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I do need speed. Is there an option?
> >>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 15, 7:43 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I do need speed. Is there an option?
Mind telling us what you *actually* want to achieve? (What do you want to
calcula
On Jun 16, 12:57 am, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 15, 11:30 pm, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> > > accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while
On Jun 15, 11:30 pm, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> > accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
> > attaining it. After approx. 680 seconds, Python gets stuck and te
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
> attaining it. After approx. 680 seconds, Python gets stuck and tells
> me the object has passed lightspeed. I put the same equations in
>
On Jun 15, 9:41 pm, Mensanator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jun 15, 12:10 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 7:43 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Jun 15, 9:31 pm, casevh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Not yet: I was kind of set back when I saw their homepage was last
> > updated 2002. But I'll give it a try. You think it's the best thing
> > there is?
>
> > Thanks,
> > Ram.
>
> gmpy has moved to Google.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/gmpy/
On Jun 15, 8:52 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> > accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
> > attaining it. After approx. 680 seconds, Python gets stuck and tells
>
On Jun 15, 10:01 pm, "Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |> How did you determine that standard python floats are not good enough?
>
> | I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> | accelerate and to get
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|> How did you determine that standard python floats are not good enough?
| I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
| accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
|attaining it.
Just a thoug
On Jun 15, 12:10 pm, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 15, 7:43 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > I do need speed. Is there an option?
>
> > >> Mind telling
> Not yet: I was kind of set back when I saw their homepage was last
> updated 2002. But I'll give it a try. You think it's the best thing
> there is?
>
> Thanks,
> Ram.
gmpy has moved to Google.
http://code.google.com/p/gmpy/
gmpy only support the basic floating point operations so it may not b
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
> accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
> attaining it. After approx. 680 seconds, Python gets stuck and tells
> me the object has passed lightspeed. I put the same equations in
>
On Jun 15, 7:43 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > I do need speed. Is there an option?
>
> >> Mind telling us what you *actually* want to achieve? (What do you want to
> >> calculate?)
>
Peter Otten wrote:
>
> How did you determine that standard python floats are not good enough?
> Everything beyond that is unlikely to be supported by the hardware and
> will therefore introduce a speed penalty.
>
> Did you try gmpy?
I would like to add: If Python's precision (or that of additiona
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I do need speed. Is there an option?
>>
>> Mind telling us what you *actually* want to achieve? (What do you want to
>> calculate?)
>>
>> Christian
>
> Physical simulations of objects with near-light
On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I do need speed. Is there an option?
>
> Mind telling us what you *actually* want to achieve? (What do you want to
> calculate?)
>
> Christian
Physical simulations of objects with near-lightspeed velocity.
--
http://mail.python.
> I do need speed. Is there an option?
Mind telling us what you *actually* want to achieve? (What do you want to
calculate?)
Christian
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Jun 15, 5:05 pm, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Does it mean that even now it does arithmetic in 64 bit?
> > I'm not getting enough precision. Is there any way to increase it?
>
> Buy a good book about numerics or take a course. ;)
>
> Seriously, compu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Does it mean that even now it does arithmetic in 64 bit?
> I'm not getting enough precision. Is there any way to increase it?
Buy a good book about numerics or take a course. ;)
Seriously, computers and IEEE 754 floating point numbers have a lot of
pit falls. If you cho
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2:48 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > Quick question:
>> > I have python code that does a lot of floating point arithmetic. How
>> > do I make it do the arithmetic in 64 bit? (I have a 64 bit CPU.) If
>> > I'll instal
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 8:02 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Jun 15, 2:48 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Quick question:
> > > I have python code that does a lot of floating point arithmetic. How
> > > do I make it do the arithme
On Jun 15, 2:48 pm, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Quick question:
> > I have python code that does a lot of floating point arithmetic. How
> > do I make it do the arithmetic in 64 bit? (I have a 64 bit CPU.) If
> > I'll install a 64-bit operating system, will
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quick question:
> I have python code that does a lot of floating point arithmetic. How
> do I make it do the arithmetic in 64 bit? (I have a 64 bit CPU.) If
> I'll install a 64-bit operating system, will that do the trick?
The Python float type uses a C double internall
Quick question:
I have python code that does a lot of floating point arithmetic. How
do I make it do the arithmetic in 64 bit? (I have a 64 bit CPU.) If
I'll install a 64-bit operating system, will that do the trick?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
34 matches
Mail list logo
