request for Fixed32 too about fixedmath.net HOT 4 CLOSED

There's a Fix32 type in the Experimental folder if you want to play with it. The big performance advantage would be multiplication because you could write it as simply the multiplication of two 64-bit integers and not have to deal with all the splitting and checking for overflow BS that Fix64 has to do (because there are no hardware 128-bit integers). Also in x86 of course it would be faster because the type fits in registers. Apart from that though I wouldn't expect much difference. Most of the perf. loss vs floating-point math is the poor codegen (lack of inlining, enregistering of function parameters etc.) as far as I can tell.

Good ideas about readonly struct and Min/Max functions. Note that Fix64 is fairly immune to those defensive copy issues because almost all the operations are static methods, but it could help for .ToString() and .RawValue.

from fixedmath.net.

Oh, there's a Fix32 already, I'll take a look at it!

You can specify an attribute so the compiler knows you want inlining:

[System.Runtime.CompilerServices.MethodImpl(System.Runtime.CompilerServices.MethodImplOptions.AgressiveInlining)]
public static void SomeMethod()
{
...
}

from fixedmath.net.

Yeah, and I just noticed it's mistakenly called Fix16 but it's really a 32-bit Q15.16 type. Use at your own risk, it's really a draft I didn't spend much time on.
I played around with AgressiveInlining before but I know some people compile this for .NET 4 (Unity3D). Would be worth revisiting indeed.

from fixedmath.net.

@asik

I played around with AgressiveInlining before but I know some people compile this for .NET 4 (Unity3D).

There is already .NET 4.6 support in up-to-date Unity3D which support AggressiveInlining, so forgot worry about legacy for optimizations sake :)
And, anyway, thanks for your work on FixedMath, please keep going!

from fixedmath.net.