Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!yale!mintaka!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!bcsaic!carroll
From: carroll@bcsaic.UUCP (Jeff Carroll)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: complex*32?
Message-ID: <20285@bcsaic.UUCP>
Date: 13 Feb 90 23:34:37 GMT
References: <9002120228.AA19489@euler.Berkeley.EDU> <KHB.90Feb12174730@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: carroll@bcsaic.UUCP (Jeff Carroll)
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle
Lines: 19

In article <KHB.90Feb12174730@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM> khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman - SPD Advanced Languages) writes:
>
>IEEE double is large enough that quad precision (*32) isn't needed. I
>neglected to be specific in my previous posting. _roughly_ speaking
>ieee dp is good from 10**-308 to 10**+308. 
>

	This reminds me of the answers I used to get from a certain
vendor of test equipment based in Palo Alto. When I thought of a
really creative application for one of their boxes, the salesman would
ask, "Why would you want to do THAT???"

	The WHOLE POINT is that some of us think that we *may need*
COMPLEX*32.

	But then, we probably won't be doing this work on Suns...

	Jeff Carroll
	carroll@atc.boeing.com