Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
"Vitaly Budovski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Both floats and integers have their share of problems. Since the square
root operation has been removed, we are dealing with much larger
numbers, potentially larger than can fit into unsigned int without
looping back around. This is why I think keeping distances as floats is
a good idea, since they can represent a much larger range of values.
Not really. sizeof(float) == 4, i.e. same as sizeof(int), but a float
type carries much more information, therefore can't "deal with much
larger numbers".
Yes, but you agree that a float can represent much larger values than
4294967295?
This is the point I'm trying to make.
As
I mentioned earlier, there is no noticeable performance difference
between using floats and integers (cheap operations +-*) for the
distances so I really don't see the reason for all the resistance.
Even if it looks like a "cheap" operation, floating point operations
are much slower than an integer ones.
Really, the performance difference is not noticeable in this instance.
But I'm open to any ideas you may have as to how we could avoid using
floats, yet not run into the overflow situations so easily. We could
probably use division somewhere but I don't think that's actually any
better performance-wise.
