Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Floating Point
Message-ID: <2112.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 13 Dec 90 12:35:00 GMT
Organization: String, Scotch tape, and Paperclips.  (in Pgh, PA)
Lines: 26


 Date: 12-11-90 (19:00)              Number: 498 of 498 (Echo)
   To: GARY SMITH                    Refer#: 476
 From: RAY DUNCAN                      Read: NO
 Subj: FLOATING POINT                Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
 Conf: FORTH (58)                 Read Type: GENERAL (+)

    >Besides Harris, I believe LMI... uses a floating point
    >implementation without a floating point stack

 That's right.  Our "official" versions of software floating point and
 hardware-assisted floating point do not maintain the numbers on a
 separate stack.  We have been doing it this way for about 10 years and
 we have never found it to be a problem.

 For those people who need the last drop of performance, we have a
 separate version of our hardware floating point implementation available
 for downloading on our BBS which maintains the floating point values on
 the Intel 80x87 floating point stack and allows explicit chaining of
 calculations on the separate stack.

 NET/Mail : LMI Forth Board, Los Angeles, CA (213) 306-3530
 <<<>>>
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett through a semi-automated process.
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us or uunet!willett!dwp