On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Daniel Serpell <dserp...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi!, >>>> >>>> El Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:42:30AM -0500, Ganesh Ajjanagadde escribio: >>>>> Whoever wrote this stuff had a pretty bad libm - digits differ pretty >>>>> quickly. >>>> >>>> They where correctly rounded to 24bit precision. I don't know if that >>>> was intentional, so I can't comment on the correctness of the patch. >>> >>> Unless I am off here, doing things at 24 bits makes very little sense: >>> float itself offers 32 bits >> >> Actually floats offer 23-bits of precision for the significand (with 8 >> for mantissa and one sign bit) - 7-8 digits, so any more precision >> than that couldn't be stored accurately anymore, so when using single >> precision like this code, more precision is not needed. > > Point taken. However, the general remark still applies: precision is > being lost unnecessarily at an intermediate computation stage since it > is anyway a static computation. > >> Maybe it was even specifically wanted to have values that are >> represented accurately, but I do not know the history of this code >> either.
pushed >> >> - Hendrik >> _______________________________________________ >> ffmpeg-devel mailing list >> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org >> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
