|
|
|
| Authored by: Nick_UK on Thursday, March 28 2013 @ 12:31 PM EDT |
But to be honest, this is all the same thing. It is only mathematical notation
that is different, not the calculations/maths.
Nick[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PJ on Thursday, March 28 2013 @ 01:36 PM EDT |
Hmm. I wonder if Red Hat can get its legal fees paid,
then?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 28 2013 @ 01:55 PM EDT |
I believe that the actual floating point math happens in the
FPU portion of the CPU. In older machines that could have
been a separate chip. One might have to poke around in the
C (or what ever other langauge that supports FP math)
libraries to see what actually happens. I seem to recall
that some libraries could be compiled to do FP calculations
in software if the computer did not have an FPU, but it would
be at a much slower speed of course.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 28 2013 @ 03:44 PM EDT |
Fixed point is not covered by the
claim because the claim specifically
point out that the format contains an
exponent which by definition fixed
point does not.
I've not looked inside the Linux
kernel recently but it's very unlikely
that it uses the floating point
registers other than to save/restore
them on context switches.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: globularity on Friday, March 29 2013 @ 05:46 AM EDT |
While there are many embedded processors and old intel processors which do not
have hardware floating point processors, I cannot think of any mainstream server
processors which do not have a hardware floating point unit, so even if the
kernel had libraries which infringed the trolls junk patent, they would never be
called.
---
Windows vista, a marriage between operating system and trojan horse.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
