commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>
Subject Re: [Math] FastMath Performance
Date Wed, 26 Jan 2011 11:05:32 GMT
Hi.

I'd wish to make it clear that I referred to this statement:

> > > The Javadoc for FastMath says that it is a replacement for
> > StrictMath,
> > > which is why I tested against that.

An my understanding was:

> > Unless I'm missing something, this is a doc mistake then.

So we have:

[Please correct me if the following statement is wrong.] "StrictMath" must
reproduce the _same_ results on any JVM.
Then, to be replacement, "FastMath" must reproduce those _same_ (i.e. same
as "StricMath") results.
Is that the case?

If "FastMath" is as fast (or faster), for all methods, than "Math" (while
being as accurate), then it is a replacement of "Math".
Is that the case? [Luc already answered "Yes" to that question.]


Regards,
Gilles

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message