On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Russell Whitaker wrote:
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Jean-Pierre Vial wrote:
A 15:36 01/07/03 +0200, Mirsad Todorovac a écrit :
Please read without prejudice!
What would you think of the following: we all know about various bitsizes Integer and Cardinal types.
[ snip ]
In the meanwhile gcc-3.3.1 is due out in a few days; there's enough stuff on the "to do" lists to keep Frank busy for the next six months. Unless it's really important I'd like to suggest not adding any new features to the "to do" list for a while.
my 2 cents, Russ
Thanks, Russ, for mentioning this. (I hope gcc-3.3's DFA scheduler will improve code optimization, if nothing else, so it'll be worthwhile to adapt GPC to work with it ...)
Anyway, I propose we put thing of this sort on a WISH-LIST, w priorities, so we'd don't forget about it and propose it again.
IMHO this parametrized reals might be a good idea, yet GPC should worry only about loads from/stores into Reals with this new precision, all arithmetic would inevitably have to be done in standard single/double/long double floats, since back-end is simply not ready for Reals of this type at present, and may even never be.
The latter means GPC would be heavied with tons of possibly obfuscated code.
Being able to store Reals in space-saving format when excess precision is not needed wouldn't hurt OTOH, and I propose we put this on not TO-DO, but on the WISH-LIST.
(* IMHO GCC back-end is fundamentally behind some already marketed processors on having 128-bit or even 256-bit Integers, Cardinals or Reals. *)
My $0.02 :-)
Mirsad