On Jan 23, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Carl Witty wrote:

> On Jan 23, 1:43 pm, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>> 3) I'm (still!) rewriting fast_float; one of the goals of the  
>>> eventual
>>> rewrite is to have a mode that uses Sage objects instead of  
>>> floating-
>>> point numbers (of course, this is much, much slower than the  
>>> floating-
>>> point mode, but it's still quite a bit faster than calling out to
>>> maxima).  If I ever finish the rewrite, then perhaps symbolic
>>> functions could use this mode automatically.
>>
>> How is this going? I hadn't heard any more on it, so I wondered if
>> you were still working on it.
>
> I'm almost at feature parity with the original fast_float, at which
> point I plan to submit it.  (Within the next month or so, if I manage
> to keep working at it reasonably steadily.)
>
> This version would have interpreters for C doubles (like the existing
> fast_float), MPFR, and Python objects.  It's also significantly faster
> than the existing fast_float interpreter.

Very cool.

> It will not yet support the
> extra features I was promising (conditionals, common subexpression
> elimination); I also plan to eventually add special handling for a lot
> more types.

One thought I had was that support for a wide variety of types could  
be done by manipulating function pointers. This would make it easy to  
give support for a wide variety of types without a lot of specialized  
work.

- Robert


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to