|
|
|
|
|
|
by andrepd
24 days ago
|
|
|
> The takes I've seen from pretty much all the numerical analysts is that posits are not really viable as a replacement for floating-point; they're just a much worse implementation Care to elaborate? All the analyses I've seen show that posits achieve generally higher precision at the same number of bits compared to IEEE floats. You don't even necessarily need to care about scaling your inputs to be close to ±1; most problem domains already naturally have this! The "quire" accumulator also enables new kinds of algorithms that are just not possible with IEEE (technically one can have a fixed-point accumulator for IEEE floats, but it's not as practical). |
|
|