os/doc
3
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Rewrite "math co-processor" answer to make it more clear and readable.

Browse source 
Do we even run out-of-the-box on hardware without a math co-processor
these days?
This commit is contained in:
Michael Lucas 2005-05-12 15:05:38 +00:00
parent 0f7077fafc
commit d8250d6e27
Notes: svn2git 2020-12-08 03:00:23 +00:00 
svn path=/head/; revision=24539
1 changed files with 5 additions and 5 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

10
en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/book.sgml
View file

@ -2262,16 +2262,16 @@ sectors/track: 63</screen>
<answer> <answer>
<note> <note>
<para>This will only affect 386/486SX/486SLC owners - other <para>This only affects 386/486SX/486SLC owners - other
machines will have one built into the CPU.</para> machines have one built into the CPU.</para>
</note> </note>
<para>In general this will not cause any problems, but there are <para>In general not having a math co-processor will not cause any problems, but there are
circumstances where you will take a hit, either in performance circumstances where you will take a hit, either in performance
or accuracy of the math emulation code (see the section <link or accuracy of the math emulation code (see the section <link
linkend="emul">on FP emulation</link>). In particular, drawing linkend="emul">on FP emulation</link>). In particular, drawing
arcs in X will be VERY slow. It is highly recommended that you arcs in X will be VERY slow. We recommend
buy a math co-processor; it is well worth it.</para> purchasing a math co-processor or modern hardware.</para>
<note> <note>
<para>Some math co-processors are better than others. It <para>Some math co-processors are better than others. It