On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 19:47:34 +0200
Martti Kühne <mysatyre_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> There are insignificant differences to results with this number
> (256.99999), but it's a significantly faster than glibc's ceilf (which
> takes about 200%).
But who'd specify a scaling factor of 1.99999 or sth.?
BTW: Casting to int yields the exact same results for both CEIL and
ceilf in my setup.
Cheers
FRIGN
--
FRIGN <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Tue Jun 24 2014 - 20:19:34 CEST