Like I said, "...oh well..."
Might just be my old machine that is giving
me inaccurate results from StrictMath. It's
an old PIII. But I can't get back 0 or 1
from the sin() method when I need them to be 0 or 1.
Also, what should be a straight integer multiply
using real numbers for the integer value frequently
returns a non integer result. I'll get back a number
like (and this is a fabricated example for clarity not
an actual calculation) 9.9999 when I should get 10.0.
Stuff like that and the trig() methods are really slow.
I use a 7'th degree Legrange polynomial multiplication for an
approximation of atan2() because it's faster than atan2().
That's not right...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Er... is StrictMath already FPU accelerated? If it
is then, oh well...
Its as far accalerated as the FPU produces acceptable results.
For example on x86 the sin-command is used only in a special range where its
known to be correct.
The current Math package is really not very good.
Especially
or low level graphics stuff where 5 significant
digits is
the minimum accuracy that is useful.
Almost can't believe that its so inaccurat, they do a great amount of work to
ensure that as far as I know.
After all, using straight FPU commands, accuracy won't be any better, at least
on x86.
lg Clemens
[Message sent by forum member 'linuxhippy' (linuxhippy)]
http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=301778
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA2D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA2D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
