On Samstag 01 Mai 2010, Ullrich von Bassewitz wrote: > So if cc65 isn't going to have a standard compliant floating point type > anyway, why not use IEEE single precision for "double" and IEEE half > precision for "float"? This might actually be a viable solution for both > types. Does anybody have experiences with this format? i dont have experience with that particular format.... but i have made my own 16bit float routines, derived from the kernal float routines, many years ago... and they were sufficient for my practical uses (precalculating various things i needed) and reasonably fast. using 32bit floats for doubles and half- precision for floats sounds like a good idea to me. -- http://www.hitmen-console.org http://magicdisk.untergrund.net http://www.pokefinder.org http://ftp.pokefinder.org Imagination is more important than knowledge. <Albert Einstein> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Sun May 2 18:08:09 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2010-05-02 18:08:12 CEST