[Shootout-list] Mandelbrot Set for CMUCL and SBCL 2nd try

[Yannick Gingras]

--nextPart6324535.YaJfSkGkUn
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On March 30, 2005 01:31 pm, Greg Buchholz wrote:
> =A0 =A0I also looked at the output of the given program (after correcting=
 for
> the off-by-one error). =A0Well, it turns out that pixel #300 is the only
> failing pixel for N=3D400 . =A0This was also the case for an original oca=
ml
> implementation. =A0Christophe Troestler investigated this anomoly, and I
> think it might have been due to a bug in the ocaml compiler. =A0See this
> message from a previous conversation at the shootout...
>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/shootout-list/2005-February/0010=
57
>.html
>
> Maybe a similar issue is affecting the CMUCL compiler?

Actually, the way I computed the set was open to a possible
cancellation error when crossing either axis.  The way it is computed
in C is probably more stable but definitely slower since it involves a
divide where I used a single addition.  I submitted a version really
isomorph to C:

https://alioth.debian.org/tracker/index.php?func=3Ddetail&aid=3D301324&grou=
p_id=3D30402&atid=3D411646

The output is fully similar to C for N in {200, 400, 800}.

=2D-=20
Yannick Gingras         Math Student, UQAM
Join FSF as an Associate Member at:
  http://member.fsf.org/join?referrer=3D2327


--nextPart6324535.YaJfSkGkUn
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCS4ayX5grbfhLwA4RAvz7AJ482WlX/vmuTp8ocZt5ehy2/SGI0gCeM1R8
bCAC5WIle8zzO1qBJYTfTPw=
=RxfP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart6324535.YaJfSkGkUn--