27 Jun
2004
27 Jun
'04
1:52 p.m.
On Sun, 2004-06-27 at 08:30, Tim Goetze wrote:
[Simon Jenkins]
You'd probably need to AND and shift by 23 prior to starting this.
This is much nicer than my first cut. I was using brute force on the
ORs. Also, I believe you're right about the FPU short-cutting a
multiply by zero.
Jan
Tim Goetze wrote:
elegant indeed (though the exponent is not in the lowest 8 bits so it
needs another shift, no?)
8-bit exponent and no assumption about its value
made, 8 binary
'shift', 7 'or' and 1 'and' statement if i'm not badly
mistaken. and
if i'm not, a branch will probably hurt less.
Three shifts, three copys, three 'or's and an 'and':
copy = value;
value |= copy >> 4;
copy = value;
value |= copy >> 2;
copy = value;
value |= copy >> 1;
value &= 0x01;