comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive - RDF feed
type: channel
description: Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado
items: IDL platform difference
items: Re: IDL platform difference

IDL platform difference
type: item
description: I have noticed that IDL for Windows and IDL for MacOS seem to handle some calculations and/or output using float variables differently. I have a procedure that is carrying out a large calculation and printing the results to a file. When I run the same procedure on the two different platforms, I get two different amswers. Example: On the PC: 4.94e+009 On the Mac: 4.93e+09 I expected the difference in the number of zeroes in the exponent, but not the change in value. Has anyone ever encountered this before? I understand the difference is small, but there really shouldn't be any difference at all. Thanks for any help. S.Thiel beorabor@bemail.com
creator: Hubert Dietl
date: 1999-03-25T08:00:00-00:00

Re: IDL platform difference
type: item
description: Peter Mason wrote: > > I think that the differences seen here are due to differences in FPU > architecture (even though all these platforms store the numbers in IEEE > format *in memory*). The Intel x86 has 80-bit floating-point registers. I > don't know what mac hardware you're using, but I'd bet that it's different. > From what I recall, the Alpha is less than 80 bits. (I think you get what > you ask for on Alpha? - viz. 32-bits for single precision.) So results for > an operation as simple as a single subtraction or addition can differ > noticeably, even in double precision. Even a half-decent compiler will keep > some operands in registers for a while (at least sometimes), so these > differences can easily build up. (Well, there's a compiler option to force > them out to memory straight away, but I don't think IDL is compiled like > this.) So given the nature of the beast, it's risky to rely on *exact* > floating-point numbers, especially across platforms and/or with algorithms > that push the precision. > > Peter Mason The problem seems to be more general: we upgraded from IDL5.0 to IDL5.2 (for the UNIx Platform). Numerical results are different for IDL 5.2 and IDL5.0 on the same platform. These new results are closer to WINDOWS results(5.0). When we use IDL 5.2(windows) with double floats we obtain the same results on all IDL5.2 platforms. Does someone else encounter the same troubles in upgrading from 5.0 to 5.2? Thank you -- Christophe Marque
creator: Christophe Marque
date: 1999-03-30T08:00:00-00:00

Re: IDL platform difference
type: item
description: > Hubert Dietl wrote: >> I have noticed that IDL for Windows and IDL for MacOS seem to handle >> some calculations and/or output using float variables differently. I >> have a procedure that is carrying out a large calculation and printing >> the results to a file. When I run the same procedure on the two >> different platforms, I get two different amswers. <...> And Christophe Marque <Christophe.Marque@obspm.fr> wrote: > I have yet encountered the same problem in running a complicated program > on a Windows NT IDL and a UNIX Digital alpha IDL. <...> > I thought the difference was the 2 kinds of processors: > Intel 32 bits and Dec alpha 64 bits. > The main trouble is you have the same behaviour when you use double > floats instead of floats. I think that the differences seen here are due to differences in FPU architecture (even though all these platforms store the numbers in IEEE format *in memory*). The Intel x86 has 80-bit floating-point registers. I don't know what mac hardware you're using, but I'd bet that it's different. From what I recall, the Alpha is less than 80 bits. (I think you get what you ask for on Alpha? - viz. 32-bits for single precision.) So results for an operation as simple as a single subtraction or addition can differ noticeably, even in double precision. Even a half-decent compiler will keep some operands in registers for a while (at least sometimes), so these differences can easily build up. (Well, there's a compiler option to force them out to memory straight away, but I don't think IDL is compiled like this.) So given the nature of the beast, it's risky to rely on *exact* floating-point numbers, especially across platforms and/or with algorithms that push the precision. Peter Mason -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
creator: menakkis
date: 1999-03-30T08:00:00-00:00