Re: [9fans] circular fonctions: precision?

[andrew zerger <rhoyerboat@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1038 bytes --]

 havent read any of these specs but im sitting here thinking that bits on a
processor that can subtract == more preicision ..

On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 12:44 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>wrote:

> > IEEE754-1985 didn't specify circular, hyperbolic or other
> > advanced functions. You can have 754 compliant hardware and
> > not implement these functions. In any case the standard can
> > not dictate the accuracy of functions not specified in it. An
> > iterative algorithm may lose more than 1 bit of accuracy since
> > iterations won't be done in infinite precision. One can not
> > assume accuracy to a bit even where these functions are
> > imeplemented in h/w.  For x86, accuracy may be specified in
> > some Intel or AMD manual.
>
> that wasn't my reading of the spec.  so you're saying that if
> the iterative algorithm loops 53 times, it's free to return any
> answer whatever and still be compliant?
>
> - erik
>
>


-- 
⎼⎺⎺├@┼␊├├≤-␍⎼␊▒␍:/␤⎺└␊/⎼␤⎺#

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1444 bytes --]