On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 17:38:24 -0500 Jan Depner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-06-25 at 13:49, Tim Blechmann wrote: > > > I have a denormal fix without a branch but you probably don't want > > > to see it ;-) > > > It's pretty simple, just OR the bits of the exponent together > > > which gives either > > > 0 (denormal) or 1, typecast that to float, and then multiply the > > > original float by that (0.0 or 1.0). Voila, no branch, but it is > > > messy looking ;-) > > > > there is one problem ... if you multiply the denormal number with > > the 1 or 0, you will probably have one denormal operation on the cpu > > instead of a branch ... i don't know, that's worse ... > > but definitely, some benchmarks would be useful for any denormal > > flushing algorithm... > > > > The definition of denormal is that the exponent is 0 so you will > never > multiply a denormal by 1, only by 0. I'm not sure whether that would > be a denormal operation or not. It depends on the compiler. hm ... someone should write a test for all these algorithms ... i'm curious, how different compilers / different algorithms actually affect the speed of the code ... cheers.... tim -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 96771783 After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say "I want to see the manager." William S. Burroughs