Browse thread
[Caml-list] speed
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2003-01-21 (13:16) |
From: | Daniel Andor <da209@c...> |
Subject: | Re: Coyote Gulch test in Caml (was Re: [Caml-list] speed ) |
On Tuesday 21 January 2003 1:09 pm, David Chase wrote: > At 02:39 AM 1/21/2003 +0500, Nickolay Semyonov-Kolchin wrote: > >Speed and accuracy are different things. Matlab class software need > > accuracy, most computer games need speed. This is the reason of > > "-ffast-math" key in gcc. Ocaml lacks such key, and always produce > > ineffecient floating-point code. > > But how much accuracy do computer games need? First-class implementations > of sin/cos in software are quite fast, indeed faster (in certain > non-trivial ranges) than the hardware itself. If it happens that you could > determine how *little* accuracy you actually need, it could go faster yet > :-). If only a few significant figures are of interest to you then you could use lookup tables, no? How would the lookup overhead compare with the actual computation time? D ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners