[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [f-cpu] Re: Floating-Point

To: f-cpu@seul.org
Subject: Re: [f-cpu] Re: Floating-Point
From: Michael Riepe <michael@stud.uni-hannover.de>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:14:39 +0200
Delivery-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 13:38:52 -0400
In-Reply-To: <0CFA3081B86BD311B37A00902762718F0152F053@po1-exch.lon.tudor.com>; from Hans Summers on Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 09:48:00AM +0100
References: <0CFA3081B86BD311B37A00902762718F0152F053@po1-exch.lon.tudor.com>
Reply-To: f-cpu@seul.org
Sender: owner-f-cpu@seul.org

On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 09:48:00AM +0100, Hans Summers wrote:
[...]
> Previously you insisted on fixed latency. 

Latency may depend on the chunk (= operand) size, but not on the
operands.  That is, it is known at *decode time*.

-- 
 Michael "Tired" Riepe <Michael.Riepe@stud.uni-hannover.de>
 "All I wanna do is have a little fun before I die"
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@seul.org with
unsubscribe f-cpu       in the body. http://f-cpu.seul.org/

References:
- RE: [f-cpu] Re: Floating-Point
  - From: Hans Summers <Hans.Summers@tudor.com>

Prev by Date: [f-cpu] ERIN32 Presentation
Next by Date: Re: [f-cpu] the wrong way (or not?) concerning FP
Prev by thread: RE: [f-cpu] Re: Floating-Point
Next by thread: RE: [f-cpu] Re: Floating-Point
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread