| ??? 01/12/05 17:55 Read: times |
#84865 - Oh please, not again! Responding to: ???'s previous message |
"I think you are going to find the concensus is that floating point math is far too inefficient for an 8051/8052 derivative."
This is a bit of an old chestnut that gets trotted out from time to time. There are lots of applications (such as dataloggers) that the 8051 is ideally suited to where speed is not an issue. Storage capacity often is an issue, if this is the case it can make sense to process the data as far as possible before storing it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using floating point on the 8051 if appropriate. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| floating point calculations & eprom prog | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Look for a | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Floating point math | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Oh please, not again! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Appropriate | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Floating point speed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why floating point | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| FP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why Floating point indeed | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| what's real about it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| eg | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| nothing more real | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, but what about *real* ?! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| more human readable ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| display real, of course | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
FP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Fixed point | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| eval? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No FP in Keil Eval! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Compiler or Assembler? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why assembler? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why floating-point? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Link | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ISP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Please, more details! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Floating or Fixed ? | 01/01/70 00:00 |