Hi,
I'll be testing one of those this week (or early next week).
Schlomo
- Original Message -
From: "mulix" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2001 5:37 PM
Subject: ibm thinkpad r-30
> hello, linuxers,
>
> i am contemplating laying my grubby paws
Check:
http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=freecell&searchon=all&subword=1&version=all&release=all
This is the happy ending of a long story that involved Yotam Rubin, me,
and finally a registered Debian developer by the name of Risko Gergely.
Anyway, now you may apt f
Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 25 Dec 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
> > Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > But who is John Galt? Speed is not of the outmost importance in
> > > this case, so I think my implementation is fine.
> >
> > Only you can judge that. It's no
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Implementation of log(x) for
SPARC32":
> Actually, I checked it against the numbers in the range 0 .. 1, which is
> my working range, and I discovered it returns very inaccurate results.
> With some input from Ehud Karni, I wrote an improved func
On 25 Dec 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
> Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > But who is John Galt? Speed is not of the outmost importance in this case,
> > so I think my implementation is fine.
>
> Only you can judge that. It's not only speed - are you sure that
> whatever approximation
hello, linuxers,
i am contemplating laying my grubby paws upon a shiny new ibm thinkpad
r-30. a quick google search didnt show any news pertinent to linux.
might one (or more) of the members of this august company be able to
shed the light of personal experience on the subject?
note: i have a th
Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But who is John Galt? Speed is not of the outmost importance in this case,
> so I think my implementation is fine.
Only you can judge that. It's not only speed - are you sure that
whatever approximation you used (I have not looked at your perl code)
wil
Title: Urgent need for Unix Developer!
Hello,
DietWatch.com, Inc, a US-based company, is looking for a Unix Developer freelancer. The UNIX developer (in Israel) should be able to take immediate job for the next week or so. I need to finalize some urgent work within the next week and it can
On 25 Dec 2001, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
> "Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I bet that the Sparc code is obfuscated for a reason (typically,
> > such codes contain "magical" tables, for example) not just because
> > the programmer was an idiot.
>
> Mathematical algorithms are usuall
"Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I bet that the Sparc code is obfuscated for a reason (typically,
> such codes contain "magical" tables, for example) not just because
> the programmer was an idiot.
Mathematical algorithms are usually very heavily optimized by hand,
loops unrolled, sc
"Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you want to understand the "tricks" usually used to calculated "special
> functions", like log (or sin or bessel functions, or whatever), you might
> want to take a look at books like "Numerical Recipes in C" (includes an
> interesting introduction
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001 13:23:20 +0200 (IST), Shlomi Fish
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> FYI, I eventually gave up and coded a logarithm function in perl:
>
> #
> #!/usr/bin/perl
>
> use strict;
>
> my $e_const = exp(1);
> my $e_const_reci = (1/$e_const);
>
> my $number = shift |
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Implementation of log(x) for
SPARC32":
> I think they do. Congrats for Intel. Even though from what I understood of
> the glibc code the log() is a base 2 logarithm for some reason. (even
> though the tailor series is for log(e)).
It's easier to
Hi
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001 at 01:41:23PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Implementation of log(x) for
>SPARC32":
> > Actually, usually glibc calls the processor's FPU logarithm routine.
>
> Oops, I didn't know the 386DX's FPU had a logarithm function
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>
> > Actually, usually glibc calls the processor's FPU logarithm routine.
>
> What about an i386 without an FPU? (an ancient 386 with no 80387, for
> instance)
>
In that case, I thinks it emulates the FPU unit.
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Actually, usually glibc calls the processor's FPU logarithm routine.
What about an i386 without an FPU? (an ancient 386 with no 80387, for
instance)
--
Tzafrir Cohen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Implementation of log(x) for
>SPARC32":
> > Actually, usually glibc calls the processor's FPU logarithm routine.
>
> Oops, I didn't know the 386DX's FPU had a logarithm function on it... Nice :)
> Do th
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: Implementation of log(x) for
SPARC32":
> Actually, usually glibc calls the processor's FPU logarithm routine.
Oops, I didn't know the 386DX's FPU had a logarithm function on it... Nice :)
Do they also have things like sqrt and cbrt?
> I did not
On Tue, 25 Dec 2001, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Implementation of log(x) for SPARC32":
> > I need an implementation of the C function double log(double x) for SPARC
> > (32-bit - not UltraSPARC) written using Assembler or C or a combination of
> > both.
>
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Implementation of log(x) for SPARC32":
> I need an implementation of the C function double log(double x) for SPARC
> (32-bit - not UltraSPARC) written using Assembler or C or a combination of
> both.
>
> I tried to rip code out of the glibc (which I
20 matches
Mail list logo
