Ilya Zakharevich on Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:22:04 -0700 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: bug in addrr |
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 05:05:27PM +0200, Karim BELABAS wrote: > * So the number of significant bits remaining in the extra word we added is > at most m - sh. If this is <= 2, I cancel the extra word and round > appropriately. > > '2' is arbitrary. '0' is completely safe (we cancel nothing but bogus bits). > Could make it 1, 2, 3 ... [ here we do cancel a few correct bits ]. > > As it stands, some routines lose precision (a little bit) faster. But it > doesn't seem to break anything, and it fixes a few problems like the above. What IEEE teaches us is that it is vital to have *exact* answers for the elementary operations. This algorithm breaks this principle; we know that it will lead to *significant* errors near the "critical" points. What IEEE does not have is a possibility to increase the precision and redo the calculations; so in the PARI situation this is a little bit less critical. But still... Ilya