On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 at 09:35:39 UTC, kinke wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 January 2019 at 23:36:55 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
llvm_exp (defers to C runtime) gives considerable speed
improvement over `std.math.exp`.
My tests back then on Linux also showed new `exp(float)` being
about half as
On Tuesday, 1 January 2019 at 23:36:55 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
llvm_exp (defers to C runtime) gives considerable speed
improvement over `std.math.exp`.
My tests back then on Linux also showed new `exp(float)` being
about half as fast as C, while the double-version was somehow 4x
faster.
On Monday, 31 December 2018 at 13:24:29 UTC, kinke wrote:
On Sunday, 30 December 2018 at 13:39:44 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
Been waiting for an exp() rewrite. And Boost-licensed! I'm
using expf() from whatever libc is shipped and the variability
of results and lack of control is annoying.
On Sunday, 30 December 2018 at 13:39:44 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
Been waiting for an exp() rewrite. And Boost-licensed! I'm
using expf() from whatever libc is shipped and the variability
of results and lack of control is annoying.
exp != {ld,fr}exp. Phobos includes a proper single/double
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 19:48:28 UTC, 9il wrote:
ldexp and frexp are base building blocks for a lot of math
functions.
Here is a small benchmark that compares Mir, C and Phobos
implementations:
Wow, thanks! Been waiting for an exp() rewrite. And
Boost-licensed! I'm using expf()
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 15:15:48 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 at 20:50, 9il via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
ldexp and frexp are base building blocks for a lot of math
functions.
Here is a small benchmark that compares Mir, C and Phobos
implementations:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 at 20:50, 9il via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
>
> ldexp and frexp are base building blocks for a lot of math
> functions.
>
> Here is a small benchmark that compares Mir, C and Phobos
> implementations:
>
> https://github.com/libmir/mir-core/blob/master/bench_ldexp_frexp.d
>
On Saturday, 29 December 2018 at 12:35:03 UTC, kinke wrote:
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 19:48:28 UTC, 9il wrote:
Any chance the multi-precision ldexp can be upstreamed to
Phobos (which currently uses real precision for the
float/double overloads, which explains the suboptimal
performance)?
On Friday, 28 December 2018 at 19:48:28 UTC, 9il wrote:
LDC, macos x64:
---
float
ldexp (Phobos time / Mir time) = 2.55584
ldexp ( stdc time / Mir time) = 0.773019
frexp (Phobos time / Mir time) = 1.04093
frexp ( stdc time / Mir time) = 1.748
