Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!brl-adm!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei.cmu.edu!firth
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: fabs(x) vs. (x) < 0 ? -(x) : (x)
Message-ID: <544@aw.sei.cmu.edu.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: Mon, 9-Feb-87 08:46:38 EST
Article-I.D.: aw.544
Posted: Mon Feb  9 08:46:38 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 10-Feb-87 04:45:56 EST
References: <4943@mimsy.UUCP> <2550005@hpisod2.HP> <756@unc.unc.UUCP> <2181@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Sender: netnews@sei.cmu.edu
Reply-To: firth@bd.sei.cmu.edu.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, SEI, Pgh, Pa
Lines: 20

In article <2181@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> braner@batcomputer.UUCP (braner) writes:
>THE COMPLETE FP LIBRARY MUST BE WRITTEN IN HAND-OPTIMIZED ASSEMBLER LANGUAGE!!!
>
>- Moshe Braner

Let me scoond this cry!  Most C mathlibs are indeed very bad.
I recall running a mathematical benchmark through a supposedly
optimising compiler and finding negligible difference in runtime
relative to the portable-C compiler generated code.  Turned out
the benchmark was spending 95% of its time computing sqrt.  We
recoded sqrt in Assembler and reduced its runtime by a factor
of 20.  As a bonus, it even returned the correct results.  I
then looked at sin, cos, log &c and... and you really don't
want to know what they were like.

As a very small nitpick with Moshe, your hand-optimised fabs
should of course check for infinity and NaNs rather than just
clearing the "sign bit".  On the PDP-11, for instance, the BIC
trick turns "reserved operand" into "zero", and some programmer
who cared about detecting uninitialised variables loses badly.