4 ms·
> ...but we use a slightly worse (but more performant) routine. If it (dragonbox?) is more performant, why is it also worse?
by ignoramous 4y ago
> ...but we use a slightly worse (but more performant) routine.
If it (dragonbox?) is more performant, why is it also worse?
- wiredfool 4y agoPresumably it's not as accurate?
- nickpeterson 4y agoSomeone needs to make a bumper sticker for developers that says “fast and wrong”. I’d imagine non-programmers would buy more of them for other reasons…
- Dylan16807 4y agoIt's only on edge cases that floating point isn't mathematically wrong. And sometimes you don't mind an extra couple ULPs of drift.
- fsckboy 4y agofast and wrong? that's not a great bumper sticker to have when you're getting pulled over for speeding.
- dantillberg 4y agoThe fast algorithm is less accurate in the least significant bits. In zX41ZdbW's first link above, there's a code comment that includes the exact count of numbers grouped by how inaccurate the results were.