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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 106c43,dad65365cb2b3396 X-Google-Attributes: gid106c43,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,dad65365cb2b3396 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,dad65365cb2b3396 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dad65365cb2b3396 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,dad65365cb2b3396 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mbk@caffeine.engr.utk.edu (Matt Kennel) Subject: Re: The disturbing myth of Eiffel portability Date: 1996/11/20 Message-ID: <56vdfg$85f@gaia.ns.utk.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 197671519 references: <3294e64b.74799475@news2.ibm.net> <56t1m4$nis@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> followup-to: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.object organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville and Oak Ridge National Laboratory reply-to: %%spam repellent: remove this prefix%%kennel@msr.epm.ornl.gov newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.object Date: 1996-11-20T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar (dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu) wrote: : The idea that it is wrong to test for exact equality is quite incorrect, : there are many algorithms where it is perfectly legitimate to test for : exact equality if you know you are dealing with IEEE arithmetic. : This *huge* performance hit occurs on fewer and fewer machines, nearly all : machines now support IEEE arithmetic, and the decision to require this : semantis in Java represents a final nail in the coffin for weird (and often : badly designed) non-IEEE arithmetic systems. I think requiring "IEEE arithmetic" is acceptable if this means "arithmetic on a well-defined finite subset of rationals" in a particular bit representation. On the other hand, I think it is too strenuous and ill-advised for a language to insist upon 100% full exact IEEE exception handling, as this is far less often compatible with high performance and portability. -- Matthew B. Kennel/mbk@caffeine.engr.utk.edu/I do not speak for ORNL, DOE or UT Oak Ridge National Laboratory/University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN USA/