Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> skribis: >> What was the rationale for ‘round-ash’? > > Well, we need it internally to efficiently convert large integers to > floating-point with proper rounding (see the call to > 'round_right_shift_exact_integer' in patch 5). Given that, it seemed > reasonable to export it to the user, since it's not possible to do that > job efficiently with our current primitives. However, I don't feel > strongly about it.
OK, the rationale makes sense to me. >> It seems to address to do two things differently from ‘ash’: it’s more >> efficient, and it rounds when right-shifting. The “more efficient” bit >> is an implementation detail that should also benefit to ‘ash’ (as a user >> I don’t want to have to choose between efficient and non-rounding.) > > No, 'round-ash' is not more efficient than 'ash'. It's more efficient > than the equivalent (round (* n (expt 2 count))). I see. I misunderstood the documentation’s reference to efficiency. Thanks, Ludo’.
