On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 01:22:10PM +0100, Philipp Überbacher wrote:
> I thought that log2() might use a different routine if the argument is a
> power of 2. I guess that even if it does it's nothing to rely on because
> another libm implementation might not do the same thing.
There are very good reasons why math routines don't do such things.
> Why did you choose 1e-6 specifically?
It does the job. 1e-6f will also work for single precision.
> ... Without optimisation the output is quite
> different, but beginning with -O2 the machine code appears all the same.
That could well be completely different on an another CPU and compiler,
and even more so if tested ***in context***. Such tests are really
pointless, in particular if you consider the actual use of this code.
It isn't executed 100 times for each audio sample.
> If the optimised code really is the same is it worth it to use funky bit
> shifting operations?
There's nothing funky about them, they are part of C and C++.
Ciao,
-- FA There are three of them, and Alleline. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-userReceived on Sat Jan 29 16:15:05 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jan 29 2011 - 16:15:05 EET