2009/5/4 Egor Pasko <egor.pa...@gmail.com>:
> On the 0x5A5 day of Apache Harmony Tim Ellison wrote:
>> Dan Bornstein wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 4:33 AM, Egor Pasko <egor.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> // Non-zero and non-NaN equality checking.
>>>> if (float1 == float2 && (0.0f != float1 || 0.0f != float2)) {
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>
>>> Would the following be a useful and safe improvement over the above?:
>>>
>>> if (float1 == float2 && 0.0f != (float1 + float2)) {
>>>
>>> I think this would save at least one test and branch. I'm not an
>>> IEEE754 expert, but I think that, given that the two floats are ==,
>>> the second test could only be true if they are both zeroes.
>>
>> In fact, since you have the ==, why is it not sufficient to say
>>
>> (float1 == float2 && 0.0f != float1)
>>
>> Discuss :-)
>
> agreed!
>
> --
> Egor Pasko
>
>
Also agreed with everything above :-) One final thing is that the
final comparisons of == and < could be replaced with (NB.
-Integer.MIN_VALUE == Integer.MIN_VALUE):
return (f1 >> 32) - (f2 >> 32)
does anyone have a performance feeling about that?
Regards,
Ian
