Re: Signed multiplication

By "signed" do you mean simply that "result is negative if sign bits are
different, else positive"? Or are you trying to account for overflow
somehow?

-Nate

Ullrich von Bassewitz wrote:
>                                                              
> I'm looking for a signed 16x16 => 32 multiplication routine. Currently I'm
> using the 16x16 => 32 unsigned routine with the absolute values of the
> operands, and adjust the sign of the result if necessary. But this quite some
> overhead. 
> 
> Is there a fast way to do it, for example by accounting for the sign in the
> shift-and-add loop? I've tried to find a solution myself, but all I came up
> with was extending the addition to 32 bits to keep the information about
> signedness, and this is at least as slow as using absolute values and negating
> the result.
> 
> Regards
> 
> 
>         Uz
> 

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list