| ??? 02/16/04 14:20 Read: times |
#64861 - RE: why floating point numbers? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Jill Flynn said:
...fixed point representation. I'm not altogether sure it would work for me as I need pretty accurate values, so I think I should use floating point. Rob Klein has already addressed the misconception that floating point is necessarily more accurate than fixed-point. Jill Flynn said:
...I'm using digital oscillation formula to output values to the dac Does your DAC accept floating-point values? If not, your code obviously doesn't need 'em either! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Michael | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers _ Rob | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: why floating point numbers? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Lookup Table | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Which rubbish ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: floating point numbers | 01/01/70 00:00 |