From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com>
Subject: Re: Very big Integers
Date: 1999/04/25
Date: 1999-04-25T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7fuc3k$gv4$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 87676lsl2h.fsf@bglbv.my-dejanews.com
In article <87676lsl2h.fsf@bglbv.my-dejanews.com>,
bglbv@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> 128-bit floating point may come close to the
> required 100 bits of mantissa. (In fact, on an IEEE
> machine it
> should have slightly more than that. But the "100"
> probably wasn't meant literally.)
There is no such requirement or recommendation in either
IEEE754 or IEEE854. For example, a format which was
80-bit Intel expanded to 128 bits by adding 48 bits
required to be all zeroes would be a legitimate
implementation of extended, and in any case extended
precision is not required!
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-04-25 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-04-23 0:00 Very big Integers Denny
1999-04-23 0:00 ` Samuel Mize
1999-04-24 0:00 ` bglbv
1999-04-25 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1999-04-29 0:00 ` bglbv
1999-04-25 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-04-29 0:00 ` bglbv
1999-04-26 0:00 ` Dmitri Anisimkov
1999-05-04 0:00 ` Vincent P. Amiot
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox