4 ms·
32 is plenty to represent the numbers we care about, but you'll find you probably want 64 to do math with those numbers. 64 has always been enough for me to nev
by moultano 7y ago
32 is plenty to represent the numbers we care about, but you'll find you probably want 64 to do math with those numbers. 64 has always been enough for me to never have to care about the precision, but whenever I've used 32 to save some ram, I've ended up having to think carefully about how some operation would reduce the precision in a material way.
- platz 7y agoAt 32-bit you already have a whole 16 number gap per-bit in the 200 millions: 210,828,704 210,828,720