[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations? |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Jul 2020 17:41:31 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> Anyway, since we now have bignums and have standardised on IEEE 754 binary64
> floats, is there a reason to keep byte-opt-portable-numberp?
Indeed, it seems like it might not be needed any more.
> If we want to make allowance for capricious x87 rounding, what about
> rewriting it to accept integral floats in the ±2^53 range, as well as any
> integer? This is what it might look like:
I must say I don't know what x87 rounding has to do with it.
I'd tend to assume that x87 rounding can virtually never be seen from
Elisp because it's hard to imagine how the C compiler will manage to
keep our Elisp floats long enough in the x87 stack to avoid rounding
back to 64bit floats between every Elisp-level operation.
Or are we worried about the double-rounding of x87?
Stefan
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, (continued)
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Andrea Corallo, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Andrea Corallo, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Paul Eggert, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: Hash-consing bignums (was: bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?), Stefan Monnier, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Paul Eggert, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?,
Stefan Monnier <=
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Paul Eggert, 2020/07/02
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Andrea Corallo, 2020/07/03
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/04
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/07/04
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Andrea Corallo, 2020/07/04
- bug#42147: 28.0.50; pure vs side-effect-free, missing optimizations?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/07/05