Hi all, I am one of the committers of FixedPointNumbers.jl and we are currently working on the next version, v0.9.0, to be released. This is not directly related to the visualization, but I’m writing this in the visualization category because the JuliaImages and JuliaPlots communities will be most…

I think you might have hit on the right answer: what about putting the arithmetic in a separate package? What if we had FixedPointWrappingArthmetic FixedPointSaturatingArithmetic FixedPointCheckedArithmetic FixedPointFloatArithmetic and the user/developer just picked one? The main issue I foresee…

[image] tim.holy: The main issue I foresee is we now need some mechanism of package exclusion: since they would all override Base operators, we can’t have ImageCore picking FixedPointFloatArithmetic while some other simultaneously-loaded package picks FixedPointCheckedArithmetic . The lack of…

That’s probably better. More complex and might break signatures in downstream packages, but we’re expecting to need to do a pretty big upgrade anyway when we finally decide how to handle this.

I think it might be a good idea to sort out what could cause a conflict before discussing specific ways for isolation. 1. function name I think it’s reasonable to assign different function names to different arithmetic and different operations. That is, checked_add, saturating_add and saturating_s…

[image] kimikage: Syntactically, operator symbols and function names have almost the same meaning, but semantically they are quite different. You mean the other way round, right? In any case, another solution could be sticking to the names checked_add, saturating_sub etc, and have a macro @…

There is also the generated function solution @generated myop(a, b) = :($(Symbol(DEFAULT_ARITHMETIC, :_myop))(a, b)) which will compile depending on DEFAULT_ARITHMETIC to the correct function on first use: DEFAULT_ARITHMETIC = :wrapping myop(1, 2) # calls `wrapping_myop(1, 2)` edit: though on se…

[image] kimikage: I think it might be a good idea to sort out what could cause a conflict before discussing specific ways for isolation. This “conflict” meant “what you want in common notations”. Although the inductive and deductive approaches are two sides of the same coin, I was trying to a…

I’ll give another nod to FPGA development. At least for the use case I’ve worked on I’d want something like Fixed{Int21,11}, for example. I don’t know if there’s a package providing weird sized integers. Also I’d want full control over the rounding mode and overflow behavior of every single operatio…

I’m interested in Fixed numbers from a DSP perspective (probably none of this applies to Normed). There are a few inconsistencies here, like the following. julia> x1, x2 = 0.5Q0f7, 1.75Q1f6 (0.5Q0f7, 1.75Q1f6) julia> x1 + x1 # fails -1.0Q0f7 julia> x2 + x2 # fails -0.5Q1f6 julia> x1 + x2 # …

[RFC] What should the arithmetic within the FixedPointNumbers be

Specific Domains Visualization

kimikage September 20, 2020, 4:26am 41

The performance of saturating operations or adding intrinsics

Topic		Replies	Views
The performance of saturating operations or adding intrinsics Performance	10	1860	October 19, 2020
A plea for int overflow checking as the default Internals & Design question , proposal , integer-overflow	80	12339	December 17, 2021
COBOL and Julia comparison Numerics	16	1407	October 28, 2020
PSA: floating-point arithmetic Offtopic	14	7696	July 8, 2021
Potential solution to the overflow problem; 64-bit considered harmful, 32- or 21-bit better General Usage integer-overflow	6	3790	October 18, 2021

[RFC] What should the arithmetic within the FixedPointNumbers be

Related topics