Re: Constant divisions, remainders

corbett@lupa.Eng.Sun.COM (Robert Corbett)
Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:48:27 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[5 earlier articles]
Re: Constant divisions, remainders joe@babel.ho.att.com (1992-11-05)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1992-11-08)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (1992-11-11)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (1992-11-11)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders preston@miranda.cs.rice.edu (1992-11-11)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (1992-11-12)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders corbett@lupa.Eng.Sun.COM (1992-11-12)
Re: Constant divisions, remainders jfc@athena.mit.edu (1992-11-16)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: corbett@lupa.Eng.Sun.COM (Robert Corbett)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:48:27 GMT
Keywords: arithmetic
References: 92-10-075 92-11-033

henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>[round-toward-zero division] is specifically a relic of FORTRAN,
>which made a fairly arbitrary decision for the sake of well-defined
>behavior, and has been too influential for machine designers to ignore
>ever since.


I do not believe that the chop toward zero rules had anything to do with
computers. I learned the chop toward zero rule for division in the fifth
grade back in the early 1960's. I do not believe that FORTRAN or
computers had an impact on grade school education that long ago.


I agree that FORTRAN defined division as it was implemented by the IBM
704. The question is why did the IBM 704 use the chop toward zero rule?


Yours truly,
Robert Corbett
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.