> > What I am saying is that right shifting by 1/(2**N) loses N bits of
> > precision,

> Actually we were talking about right shifting by N, which is the same as
> dividing by 2**N or multiplying by 1/(2**N). =A0Right shifting by 1/(2**N=
)
> makes no sense at all.

I think it's probably a matter of nomenclature - I've little doubt
that both commentators have a good grasp of what is involved.

I'd read "right shifting by 1/(2**N) ... " as a short hand way of
saying that 'you achieve division by a factor of 2^N by right shifting
N bits, thereby losing N bits of precision, unless you use include an
underflow register in your algorithm'. Among consenting experts in PIC
who both know what the other guy knows I'd expect such dense compound
meanings to be well enough understood. But, I may be wrong :-).


    Russell

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.