From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,5412c98a3943e746 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.129.169 with SMTP id nx9mr2691976pbb.2.1331733109461; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 06:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Path: h9ni25321pbe.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: REAL Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:51:59 +0100 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: <1u0x151ebygpz$.1f4x12uo70ifu$.dlg@40tude.net> References: <9207716.776.1331054644462.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynaz38> <4edda5mav3cf$.149pbgyxl1wx5.dlg@40tude.net> <9rplcgF5a2U1@mid.individual.net> <1psd0g0womgxi.1sle7ol12x3d5.dlg@40tude.net> <9rsahhFmr3U1@mid.individual.net> <9rvdjvFfa8U1@mid.individual.net> <4pp58h1br5sp$.yylr20e5vzxb.dlg@40tude.net> <9s1s7tF6pcU1@mid.individual.net> <1oln2mjlozzh5$.1mxrd97lrgndo.dlg@40tude.net> <9s4mseFuoaU1@mid.individual.net> <9sb3l3Fs4oU1@mid.individual.net> <4f6063b7$0$6642$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <4f609d6a$0$6628$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: FbOMkhMtVLVmu7IwBnt1tw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 2012-03-14T14:51:59+01:00 List-Id: On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:30:17 +0100, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > So it is better to keep the current > types and effects and acquire the asset. Turns hazards into > sources of achievement. When you compute anything using conventional floating point arithmetic, the result of this computation is within the bounds of the equivalent interval computation, provided, CPU has no bugs in its ALU. This is a mathematical fact. Interval arithmetic does not compute anything differently. It just keeps track of the error bounds. The disadvantages comparing to normal arithmetic is that you need twice as much memory (if the implementation is straightforward). This was an issue when intervals were actively studied (60s-70s). No any problem now. Comparing to analytical methods of error estimation. Intervals give a pessimistic one. A manual analysis based on additional knowledge (especially if variables are dependant) may sufficiently improve the estimation. It is worth to remember that floating point arithmetic does no any error estimation, whatsoever. In fact it is guaranteed to be inaccurate, which is the asset, you wrote about. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de