|
From: | Ralf Hemmecke |
Subject: | Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: algebra Makefiles withexplicit dependencies, bootstrap, fixed-points etc. |
Date: | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:31:56 +0100 |
User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041209) |
Well, is this construction better? n: Integer := someComputationWithResultBiggerThan_1E32; for i in n..n+1 repeat ...I am not saying that I would use it, but who knows what pops up in a computation?
Ralf William Sit wrote:
Let's not forget that 2^32 is over 4 billion. William -- Ralf Hemmecke wrote:This sounds like forbidding for i in 10^32 .. repeat .... or do I misunderstand something? Ralf root wrote:Steve, I don't know if there is an actual statement to the effect that the upper bound on a loop would be a register-sized number (32 or 64 bits) but at 6Mhz it seemed impossible that one could run a loop of any consequence for greater than 2^32 or 2^64 iterations. If you wanted to do that you'd have to do the looping using some other construct. In general it is safe to assume that the upper bound of the register size cannot be exceeded. There is a practical performance difference to be gained by using (declare (fixnum as the compiler can, in the best case, assign a register to the loop variable.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |