1 Nov
2013
1 Nov
'13
11:41 a.m.
On Friday 01 November 2013 11:35:34 Christopher Kormanyos wrote:
Hi folks,
Lost the original message here. Sorry.
In John's new radix-2 MP back end, names are used for common types such as:
float24_t, float53_t, float113_t.
In our proposal for floating-point typedef's having specified widths, we use names such as:
float32_t, float64_t, float128_t. Both conventions make sense in sensible ways. But only one naming convention should be used, and it should be used consistently.
Which one will it be?
I think float32_t, float64_t, float128_t are better since they describe the size of the type and are aligned with integer typedefs.