From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Everything You Know Is Wrong Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:30:26 +0100 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: LNA1TkTuMxfwTHzeJdi6nA.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:28910 Date: 2015-12-28T18:30:26+01:00 List-Id: On 2015-12-28 17:27, Nicholas Collin Paul de Gloucester wrote: > Reducing energy consumption is not a novel ideal. E.g. I quote from a > review by me of Petru Eles; Krzysztof Kuchcinski; and Zebo Peng, > "System Synthesis with VHDL", Kluwer Academic Publishers ( > WWW.ACCU.org/index.php?module=bookreviews&func=search&rid=1291 ) > which was published in "CVu", Volume 16, Number 2: > "[. . .] > > I learnt from the low-power synthesis chapter that two's complement is > believed to consume more power than sign-magnitude due to the high > level of switching needed if a variable/signal toggles between > positive and negative often. That is not the goal of energy saving agenda, which is doing less computations, e.g. by turning off some circuits or reducing frequency. I don't think anybody would seriously consider this an advantage. From the SW POV it is only more complexity, less safety etc. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de