Yes, you can reorder the list to remove the ambiguity, but sometimes the order of the list matters. The serial comma should be used when necessary to remove ambiguity, and not used when it introduces ambiguity. Rewrite the sentence when necessary. Worth noting that this is the Oxford University Press's own style rule!

There are a few good general options to extract more ILP for latency-dominated contexts, though all of them trade additional register pressure and usually some additional operation count; Estrin's scheme is the most commonly used. Factoring medium-order polynomials into quadratics is sometimes a good option (not all such factorizations are well behaved wrt numerical stability, but it also can give you the ability to synthesize selected extra-precise coefficients naturally without doing head-tail arithmetic). Quadratic factorizations are a favorite of mine because (when they work) they yield good performance in _both_ latency- and throughput-dominated contexts, which makes it easier to deliver identical results for scalar and vectorized functions.

There's no general form "best" option for optimizing latency; when I wrote math library functions day-to-day we just built a table of the optimal evaluation sequence for each order of polynomial up to 8 or so and each microarchitecture and grabbed the one we needed unless there were special constraints that required a different choice.

And mostly it has been OK, except for some cases like games or simulations that want to get bitwise identical results across HW, which (if they're lucky) just don't use these operations or (if they're unlucky) use them and have to handle mismatches somehow. Compilers never generate these operations implicitly unless you're compiling with some sort of fast-math flag, so you mostly only get to them by explicitly using an intrinsic, and in theory you know what you're signing up for if you do that.

However, this did make them unusable for some scenarios where you would otherwise like to use them, so a bunch of graphics and scientific computing and math library developers said "please fully specify these operations next time" and now NEON/SVE and AVX512 have fully-specified reciprocal estimates,¹ which solves the problem unless you have to interoperate between x86 and ARM.

¹ e.g. Intel "specifies" theirs here: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/c...

ARM's is a little more readable: https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ddi0596/2021-03/Shar...

We didn't carry that algorithm forward to arm64, sadly, because Apple's architects made fsqrt fast enough that it wasn't worth it in scalar contexts.

The approximation reported here is slightly faster but only accurate to about 2.7e11 ulp. That's totally appropriate for the graphics use in question, but no one would ever use it for a system library; less than half the bits are good.

Also worth noting that it's possible to go faster without further loss of accuracy--the approximation uses a correctly rounded square root, which is much more accurate than the rest of the approximation deserves. An approximate square root will deliver the same overall accuracy and much better vectorized performance.

My wife and I both have F31s, which we will drive until we can no longer source replacement parts unless the industry comes to its senses first (unlikely). Any time we've ever looked at plausible replacements, the screen-based controls are an immediate hard no.

Of course, now they (and almost every other manufacturer) have followed Tesla off the cliff and made everything a screen, so the current generation cars have abysmal controls.

If I$ is all you care about, then table size may not matter, but for constrained systems, other algorithms in general, and swiftDtoa in particular, may be better choices.

DEC64 is just some bullshit one dude made up, and has nothing to do with “floating-point standards.”

There are whole families of _symplectic_ integrators that conserve physical quantities and are much more suitable for this sort of problem than either option discussed. Even a low-order symplectic method will conserve momentum on an example like this.

I will be very surprised if there's anywhere in the world where the expected loss from being robbed on the street while walking exceeds the expected loss from being in a car accident while driving.

Getting in a car is by far the most dangerous thing most people do routinely.

¹ this list is outdated vis-a-vis modern mapping and includes at least one peak shorter than 4000 feet (Tecumseh) and omits at least one peak that should qualify per the rules (Guyot), but if the list were updated they would still have completed the direttissima, since they passed over Guyot on the way to the Bonds (dropping Tecumseh could only make the diretissima easier, but I'm not sure it makes much of a difference; it's been a decade or so since I hiked that section of the whites).

As an aside, that day 5 from Wildcat to Cabot is absolutely brutal even if you're fresh, to say nothing of having already covered 180 miles in the previous four days.