On 08/ 3/12 06:19 AM, Gilmore, Doug wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "C. Bergström" [mailto:cbergst...@pathscale.com] >> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2012 11:09 PM >> To: Gilmore, Doug >> Cc: open64-devel >> Subject: Re: [Open64-devel] Review request: fixing issues when building >> the compiler as 64-bit binaries >> >> >> 0007 - I wouldn't agree to changing float to double. Determining the >> actual correct size uint64_t or something is probably the most future >> proof and portable. > A floating point format is needed since calculations involving > probabilities and frequencies are being performed. > > Using single precision exposes too many situations where ties can > occur or a 1LP change in an FP calculation can the effect of a > comparison result. Using double precisions drastically reduces the > chance that these situations will arise. The precision which is available on 32bit is sufficient and I'm not buying this. *but* I'm happy to be wrong if there's a specific case you've hit/can show. -------- As mentioned above - If you need a guaranteed size for precision, printing, format.. etc it's best to use a standard type. (uint64_t, uint32_t and friends)
When using the standard types you can also cheat and match them up with portable print as well. (for pointers) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Open64-devel mailing list Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
