Talk:Extreme floating point values: Difference between revisions
m
→Humbled
m (→Humbled) |
|||
Line 23:
==Humbled==
I just re-read the Fortran and Ada entries. They are good, aren't they. RC doesn't have a method to flag particularly informative entries such as these; (but if it did, who would police attribution etc...) --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 09:31, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
:Well... No. As to the Fortran entry, I don't regard verbosity as quality. Older details regarding long-defunct machines are easily found on Bisavers, and are not specific to Fortran (and writing a good summary would require much more work). Negative zero is introduced, but we don't know why (''Certain calculations are said to benefit from the states "positive zero", and "negative zero" being available'', that can't be serious), and I don't know were the authors has found a link with theoretical differentiation. All of this is just hovering over the subject. If you want a good account, find good books or articles about floating-point (Goldberg of course, but also Higham, Golub & Van Loan, Muller...). Particularly informative, this? No, I definitely don't think so. Anyway, I don't think this is the right place for a course on floating point: RC is good but is not the right format for this, or at least not in "task space". [[User:Eoraptor|Eoraptor]] ([[User talk:Eoraptor|talk]]) 18:06, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
| |||