On 1/27/2011 6:16 AM, Denis Lila wrote:
Line 1161 - "num> 1"?
Done.
Can the compiler take care of this sort of thing? It should be able to
figure out that the only possible values for num are {0, 1, 2, 3}.
I don't think it can without a tremendous amount of code scanning. I
don't think the compiler group would find it worth the effort, or that
the translation of "num==2||num==3" can be approximated with "num>1" is
easy for a computer to come up with...
Line 1271 - if the vals are opposite sign, is it worth bisectRoot'ing?
Do you mean if badRootVal and fx are of opposite signs?
I don't think bisectRoot would be good here. It is far slower than what we
have, and in terms of accuracy we wouldn't really gain much because in
the two root case the polynomial is very flat at the second root and
evaluating solveEqn(eqn, 3, x), where x is all the doubles near the second
root, shows that the computed values change sign many, many times. BisectRoot
finds a root in an interval where the function is known to be monotonic and
has opposite signs at the end points. Monotonicity doesn't hold in this case,
so all bisectRoot would do is look for values in the interval where
solveEqn returns exactly 0, but that's not really any better than a random
sampling of the interval in the 2 root case.
Sounds good.
Is it good to go now?
1163 - I'd slice the trailing ") {" off the end of the line since that
could confuse some autoformatters that aren't good at parsing through
comments (gnuemacs sometimes reacts to unbalanced entities in comments).
1387 - very formal! I would have just put "[dlila]" where you put
"[1]". When I first saw "I am Denis Lila" I chuckled because it came
across like "I am Ironman" or "I am Legend"... ;-)
It's good to go, I don't think I need to see another webrev if you go
with the previous 2 suggestions...
...jim
