🚀 go-pugleaf

-Message-Text-Follows-
In article <20285@bcsaic.UUCP>, carroll@bcsaic.UUCP (Jeff Carroll) writes...
>In article <KHB.90Feb12174730@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM> khb@chiba.Eng.Sun.COM (Keith Bierman - SPD Advanced Languages) writes:
>>
>>IEEE double is large enough that quad precision (*32) isn't needed. I
>>neglected to be specific in my previous posting. _roughly_ speaking
>>ieee dp is good from 10**-308 to 10**+308. 
>>
>       .. material omitted ..
> 
>	The WHOLE POINT is that some of us think that we *may need*
>COMPLEX*32.

And some of us out here *know* we need COMPLEX*32.  There are a number of 
applications in my own field (seismology) where we thrash our machines
night and day to calculate pairs of quantities, take differences, and then
sum the residuals.  In principle, the differences can become vanishingly
small.  (And before anybody says it, there's a huge body of literature
out there in how to avoid/ameliorate/fine-tune these differencing processes,
but for some applications, we are just plain stuck with them).  COMPLEX*64
gives us sensible headroom in which to work ...

Russ

Signature - what me bother?