std.math performance (SSE vs. real)

[ed via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 30 June 2014 at 06:21:49 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

When precision is an issue we always choose a software solution. 
This has been my experience in both geophysics and medical device 
development. It is cheaper, faster (dev. time), and better tested 
than anything we would develop within a release time frame.

But D "real" is a winner IMO. At my last workplace we ported some 
geophysics C++ apps to D for fun. The apps required more 
precision than double could offer and relied on GMP/MPFR. It was 
a nice surprise when we found the extra bits in D's real were 
enough for some of these apps to be correct without GMP/MPFR and 
gave a real performance boost (pun intended!).

We targeted x86/x86_64 desktops and clusters running linux 
(windows and MAC on desktops as well).

We did not consider the lack of IBM 360 support to be an issue 
when porting to D :-P


Cheers,
ed