From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751253AbWCaH57 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2006 02:57:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751258AbWCaH57 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2006 02:57:59 -0500 Received: from dspnet.fr.eu.org ([213.186.44.138]:22028 "EHLO dspnet.fr.eu.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751253AbWCaH57 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2006 02:57:59 -0500 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 09:57:58 +0200 From: Olivier Galibert To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Float numbers in module programming Message-ID: <20060331075758.GB93977@dspnet.fr.eu.org> Mail-Followup-To: Olivier Galibert , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <3fd7d9680603290634n6fabcdc7r193c30447acc1858@mail.gmail.com> <20060330182643.GV27173@skl-net.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 01:46:20PM -0500, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote: > Yeah. The correct word was irrational, which is its definition. The > point was that one can do a lot of very accurate work on real numbers > without using the FP unit and the decimal system. As long as you don't use sin/cos (oops, no 3D, no polar coordinates, no FFT), sqrt (oops no lenghts), pi (oops no non-polygonal surfaces) or ln/exp (oops, a lot of things are gone there). Working with rationals is not that realistic nowadays except in things like mathematica, maple and friends. Fixed-point though is still very realistics, it's just a different precision/scale tradeoff than fp, and one you control. OG.