| ▲ | curtisf 6 hours ago | |
It's basically using the "-" embedded in the definition of the eml operator. Table 4 shows the "size" of the operators when fully expanded to "eml" applications, which is quite large for +, -, ×, and /. Here's one approach which agrees with the minimum sizes they present:
After you have ln and exp, you can invert their applications in the eml function
Using a subtraction-of-subtraction to get addition leads to the cost of "27" in Table 4; I'm not sure what formula leads to 19 but I'm guessing it avoids the expensive construction of 0 by using something simpler that cancels: | ||
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent [-] | |
| [deleted] | ||