Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Radians Or =?UTF-8?B?RGVncmVlcz8=?=
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 01:23:12 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <55fdf9ae69cdafb285b26afba62f7d46@www.novabbs.org>
References: <ur5trn$3d64t$1@dont-email.me> <ur5v05$3ccut$1@dont-email.me> <20240222015920.00000260@yahoo.com> <ur69j9$3ftgj$3@dont-email.me> <ur86eg$1aip$1@dont-email.me> <ur88e4$1rr1$5@dont-email.me> <ur8a2p$2446$1@dont-email.me> <ur8ctk$2vbd$2@dont-email.me> <20240222233838.0000572f@yahoo.com> <3b2e86cdb0ee8785b4405ab10871c5ca@www.novabbs.org> <ur8nud$4n1r$1@dont-email.me> <936a852388e7e4414cb7e529da7095ea@www.novabbs.org> <ur9qtp$fnm9$1@dont-email.me> <20240314112655.000011f8@yahoo.com> <ut17ji$27n6b$1@dont-email.me> <20240315141552.00003d38@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2133266"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="PGd4t4cXnWwgUWG9VtTiCsm47oOWbHLcTr4rYoM0Edo";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$phv1M6hH8aB5zw/UxKQT8uYy4EpU2wzKMnnIh/k4veJ5eoJSuyLrS
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2332
Lines: 18

Michael S wrote:

> To make it less tempting, you could try to push for inclusion of
> rsqrt() into basic set. Long overdue, IMHO.

Many Newton-Raphson iterations converge more rapidly with RSQRT than
with SQRT, for reasons I never looked that deeply into.

> Right now, I can't think of any other transcendental that I really want
> to elevate to higher status. It seems to me that elevation of log2(x)
> and of 2**x will do no harm, but I am not sure about usefulness.

Ln2 and EXP2 are the basis of My 66000 log and EXP families, performed in
HW function unit.

Ln2 has the property that a binade [1..2) maps directly to another binade
[2..4); exp2 has a similar property. Ln2 is easier to get good accuracy
from than Ln or Log as a starting point. But in any event:: you are always 
within a high precision multiply of the correct result = round(53×106);