Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Maybe this is why Intel give us F2XM1 (2^x - 1) as an opcode instead of, what would seem to be more useful, 2^x? Still - it requires a lot of thought from the programmer to realise he might gain some precision by removing pows and exps and splitting them up to avoid precision loss - and even more to make the jump to assembler in order to do it.



Another reason is that the operation may already be needed as a component of a trigonometric function, and it doesn't cost much to promote it to a separate opcode.


There is no 2^x opcode btw...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: