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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,183ebe04e93f0506 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 107079,183ebe04e93f0506 X-Google-Attributes: gid107079,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: fixed point vs floating point Date: 1997/11/22 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 291693091 Distribution: inet References: X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 880249000 6459 (None) 128.122.140.58 Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,sci.math.num-analysis Date: 1997-11-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Tuck said <> Surely Tuck, you know that on almost all modern machines, integer multiplication is much slower than floating-point multiplication? So even without the sift, you are behind. Sure if you never do multiplications, then the penalty for fixed-point can be close to zero (compared with flaoting-point), unless of course you want more than 32 bits of precision and you are on a 32 bit machine, then fixed-point gets very expensive.