[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: arbitrary precision support opinions

From: David Bateman
Subject: Re: arbitrary precision support opinions
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:52:16 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060921)

Martin McDermott wrote:
> Hello
> I wondering what people think about  arbitrary precision support(mostly
> for large integers).
> I'm pretty new to Octave, but it does sound pretty handy and like it
> would put it a step above Matlab. Ive also been looking for a
> interesting project for awhile now, so I'm not expecting/demanding this
> feature out of anyone.
> So, do you guys think it would be useful? Would it be used by anyone
> else? Any potential problems or general objections? 
> At first it could just be a simple ifndef to choose, and maybe later it
> could be a option during runtime (I'm not sure how yet).
> This would be a pretty big project for me so Id just like some input
> about it first.
> Thanks
> Marty
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Help-octave mailing list
> address@hidden

Matlab's fixed point toolbox is based on GMP and does arbitrary
precision integer math, but is painfully slow.. The octave fixed point
toolbox does arbitrary precision integer math with 1 to 31 bits and is
faster than the matlab fixed point code. This stuff is generally for
hardware implementations and so you typically want 8 to 16 bits in real


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]