kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey) (11/28/90)
Numerical Results addendum... =================== Vax Lisp 2.2 under Ultrix: (f 77617 33096) -54767/66192 (f 77617e0 33096) -6.338253e29 (f 77617 33096e0) ... floating overflow on (expt 33096.0 8) (f 77617d0 33096) 1.172603940053179d0 (f 77617 33096d0) -1.180591620717411d21 (f 77617l0 33096l0) 1.17260394005317863185883490452018L0 =================== MIT C-Scheme running under HP-UX Microcode 11.56 Runtime 14.104 on an HP 9000s350 (Motorola MC68020 with MC68881 co-processor). (f 77617 33096) -54767/66192 (f 77617. 33096) -2.1002051317907482e20 (f 77617. 33096.) -1.390612063527742e21 (f 77617 33096.) -1.390612063527742e21 =================== Again (for comparison) Symbolics 3600 running Genera 8.0. "d"->double-precision; "e"->single-precision exponent (f 77617d0 33096d0) -1.1805916207174113d21 (f 77617e0 33096e0) 6.338253e29 (f 77617 33096) -54767/66192 (f 77617 33096e0) 6.338253e29 (f 77617e0 33096) -6.338253e29 (f 77617d0 33096) -2.3611832414348226d21 (f 77617d0 33096e0) 1.022335026998684d30 (f 77617e0 33096d0) -2.0895373854550075d29 =================== In sending my original summary, I remarked that all implementations based on C lost. After that, Guillermo J. Rozas (a.k.a. Bill, JINX) sent me the new C-Scheme results. My apologies. The purpose of this exercise is to promote better implementations. My comment was not meant as a flame. This was fun! Let's do it again some time! -Ken kend@data.uucp
oz@yunexus.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) (12/03/90)
In article <433@data.UUCP> kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey) writes: >After that, Guillermo J. Rozas (a.k.a. Bill, JINX) sent me the >new C-Scheme results. What does "new" results mean? Are they due to a bugfix, or some optimization switch, or what? oz --- Where the stream runneth smoothest, | Internet: oz@nexus.yorku.ca the water is deepest. - John Lyly | UUCP: utzoo/utai!yunexus!oz