| ??? 08/17/06 21:33 Read: times |
#122513 - For floats, yes. For long ints ... not so sure. Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Doing a square root yourself or via a library takes a fair bit of calculation.
When using floats, yes. You can probably keep a '51 busy for quite a while this way. For long ints, depends on the accuracy. There's a very interesting article by the same Mr. Crenshaw about the topic on embedded.com, which also gave me the insight on how to eliminate the 16 multiplications from my original very-brute-force approach (wouldn't have mattered, though, as our platforms are DSPs and can multiply in one cycle). |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Things you find ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 10 lines PLUS a whole bunch of 'lines' | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I forgot to mention ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sounds reasonable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'll optimize it tomorrow. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| haven't heard of that one | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Do it using the RLC instruction. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Optimized results: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how does the lookup table approach time | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Comparison: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Table error | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No error. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| So how did you calculate/measure the average? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Right below the table: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I do the same thing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Lookup table will win hands down | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| For floats, yes. For long ints ... not so sure. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| one more thing | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| if the precision is not 'critical' | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Another source | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What about a Hardware Solution? | 01/01/70 00:00 |