Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016"
by lultimouomo on Friday January 15, 2016 @09:23AM
(#10909441)
> Because what's going to happen two years down the road when you need to get that code working on a different platform.
And what happens when the different platform handles overflow differently? Or has non-IEEE floats? Or breaks whatever assumption the C standard already makes?
Here's the thing: C is already built on assumptions, which might or might not hold for a specific platform.
Choosing which assumptions we hold true is a pragmatic choice that must be done. C does it, and does it consciously - but it doesn't mean that it nails every choice.
Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016"
by GFK_of_xmaspast on Friday January 15, 2016 @01:42PM
(#10911187)
If you're in a situation where you need specific implementation details of floating point arithmetic, then may the devil have mercy on your soul, because god certainly won't.
Wouldn't debugging / testability imply this is a fairly large proportion of programs? Having a calculation give different results on different hardware would make testing difficult: http://yosefk.com/blog/consistency-how-to-defeat-the-purpose...
Re:A critique of "How to C in 2016"
by GFK_of_xmaspast on Friday January 15, 2016 @04:01PM
(#10912117)
Your own link explains how easy it is to get different results even on the same hardware depending on compiler flags.
Because what's going to happen two years down the road when you need to get that code working on a different platform.
(In the old days, they called that thinking "all the world's a VAX", which became "all the world's linux" in the not-quite-as-old days)