From: Maurice L. <mj...@ga...> - 2003-02-28 21:14:02
|
Jo=E3o Cardoso writes: > On Friday 28 February 2003 19:51, Alan W. Irwin wrote: > | On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Maurice LeBrun wrote: > | > These are fine with me personally, yes even with_double. Althou= gh > | > in that case you may trip up some people who are used to the old= > | > behavior. > | > | OK. I left with-double=3Dno. >=20 > I don't think that Maurice really meant to keep with-double=3Dno. Af= ter=20 > all, when we change the API the consequences are much worse, and tha= t=20 > don't inhibits us from doing it. > And we have the configure summary, that clearly states the float/dou= ble=20 > status. > Also, with the new nn/csa/qhull libraries, the better is to use doub= le=20 > by default. > So, I vote for with-double=3Dyes. I didn't actually say I objected; what I wrote was: > These are fine with me personally, yes even with_double. Although in= that > case you may trip up some people who are used to the old behavior. So the latter is just a warning that this is yet another change that ma= y cause some transition problems for some people. Change is always ok if there= is a large enough benefit.. is that the case here? It's easy enough to spec= ify --with-double[=3Dyes]. Are there other benefits to be gained, other th= an working with the nn/csa/qhull libraries? Either way it won't affect me, as I always install both float & double versions. > Maurice, some time ago you argued that we should not drop float supp= ort.=20 > Could you please "argue" again? Sourceforge mailing lists don't have= a=20 > search facility, what makes difficult to find something we know is=20= > there. If your code uses large floating point arrays and you're developing on = a personal machine the 50% memory reduction gained (and some cpu time gai= ned) by using (float *) rather than (double *) can be very significant. --=20 Maurice LeBrun mj...@ga... Research Organization for Information Science and Technology of Japan (= RIST) |