Can I compute pow(10,x) at compile-time in c? - c

Question

Is it possible to compute pow(10,x) at compile time?
I've got a processor without floating point support and slow integer division. I'm trying to perform as many calculations as possible at compile time. I can dramatically speed up one particular function if I pass both x and C/pow(10,x) as arguments (x and C are always constant integers, but they are different constants for each call). I'm wondering if I can make these function calls less error prone by introducing a macro which does the 1/pow(10,x) automatically, instead of forcing the programmer to calculate it?
Is there a pre-processor trick? Can I force the compiler optimize out the library call?

Answer 1

There are very few values possible before you overflow int (or even long). For clarities sake, make it a table!
edit: If you are using floats (looks like you are), then no it's not going to be possible to call the pow() function at compile time without actually writing code that runs in the make process and outputs the values to a file (such as a header file) which is then compiled.

Answer 2

GCC will do this at a sufficiently high optimization level (-O1 does it for me). For example:
#include <math.h>
int test() {
double x = pow(10, 4);
return (int)x;
}
Compiles at -O1 -m32 to:
.file "test.c"
.text
.globl test
.type test, #function
test:
pushl %ebp
movl %esp, %ebp
movl $10000, %eax
popl %ebp
ret
.size test, .-test
.ident "GCC: (Ubuntu 4.3.3-5ubuntu4) 4.3.3"
.section .note.GNU-stack,"",#progbits
This works without the cast as well - of course, you do get a floating-point load instruction in there, as the Linux ABI passes floating point return values in FPU registers.

Answer 3

You can do it with Boost.Preprocessor:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_39_0/libs/preprocessor/doc/index.html
Code:
#include <boost/preprocessor/repeat.hpp>
#define _TIMES_10(z, n, data) * 10
#define POW_10(n) (1 BOOST_PP_REPEAT(n, _TIMES_10, _))
int test[4] = {POW_10(0), POW_10(1), POW_10(2), POW_10(3)};

Answer 4

Actually, by exploiting the C preprocessor, you can get it to compute C pow(10, x) for any real C and integral x. Observe that, as #quinmars noted, C allows you to use scientific syntax to express numerical constants:
#define myexp 1.602E-19 // == 1.602 * pow(10, -19)
to be used for constants. With this in mind, and a bit of cleverness, we can construct a preprocessor macro that takes C and x and combine them into an exponentiation token:
#define EXP2(a, b) a ## b
#define EXP(a, b) EXP2(a ## e,b)
#define CONSTPOW(C,x) EXP(C, x)
This can now be used as a constant numerical value:
const int myint = CONSTPOW(3, 4); // == 30000
const double myfloat = CONSTPOW(M_PI, -2); // == 0.03141592653

Answer 5

You can use the scientific notation for floating point values which is part of the C language. It looks like that:
e = 1.602E-19 // == 1.602 * pow(10, -19)
The number before the E ( the E maybe capital or small 1.602e-19) is the fraction part where as the (signed) digit sequence after the E is the exponent part. By default the number is of the type double, but you can attach a floating point suffix (f, F, l or L) if you need a float or a long double.
I would not recommend to pack this semantic into a macro:
It will not work for variables, floating point values, etc.
The scientific notation is more readable.

Answer 6

Actually, you have M4 which is a pre-processor way more powerful than the GCC’s. A main difference between those two is GCC’s is not recursive whereas M4 is. It makes possible things like doing arithmetic at compile-time (and much more!). The below code sample is what you would like to do, isn’t it? I made it bulky in a one-file source; but I usually put M4's macro definitions in separate files and tune my Makefile rules. This way, your code is kept from ugly intrusive M4 definitions into the C source code I've done here.
$ cat foo.c
define(M4_POW_AUX, `ifelse($2, 1, $1, `eval($1 * M4_POW_AUX($1, decr($2)))')')dnl
define(M4_POW, `ifelse($2, 0, 1, `M4_POW_AUX($1, $2)')')dnl
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("2^0 = %d\n", M4_POW(2, 0));
printf("2^1 = %d\n", M4_POW(2, 1));
printf("2^4 = %d\n", M4_POW(2, 4));
return 0;
}
The command line to compile this code sample uses the ability of GCC and M4 to read from the standard input.
$ cat foo.c | m4 - | gcc -x c -o m4_pow -
$ ./m4_pow
2^0 = 1
2^1 = 2
2^4 = 16
Hope this help!

Answer 7

If you just need to use the value at compile time, use the scientific notation like 1e2 for pow(10, 2)
If you want to populate the values at compile time and then use them later at runtime then simply use a lookup table because there are only 23 different powers of 10 that are exactly representable in double precision
double POW10[] = {1., 1e1, 1e2, 1e3, 1e4, 1e5, 1e6, 1e7, 1e8, 1e9, 1e10,
1e11, 1e12, 1e13, 1e14, 1e15, 1e16, 1e17, 1e18, 1e19, 1e20, 1e21, 1e22};
You can get larger powers of 10 at runtime from the above lookup table to quickly get the result without needing to multiply by 10 again and again, but the result is just a value close to a power of 10 like when you use 10eX with X > 22
double pow10(int x)
{
if (x > 22)
return POW10[22] * pow10(x - 22);
else if (x >= 0)
return POW10[x];
else
return 1/pow10(-x);
}
If negative exponents is not needed then the final branch can be removed.
You can also reduce the lookup table size further if memory is a constraint. For example by storing only even powers of 10 and multiply by 10 when the exponent is odd, the table size is now only a half.

Answer 8

Recent versions of GCC ( around 4.3 ) added the ability to use GMP and MPFR to do some compile-time optimizations by evaluating more complex functions that are constant. That approach leaves your code simple and portable, and trust the compiler to do the heavy lifting.
Of course, there are limits to what it can do. Here's a link to the description in the changelog, which includes a list of functions that are supported by this. 'pow' is one them.

Answer 9

Unfortunately, you can't use the preprocessor to precalculate library calls. If x is integral you could write your own function, but if it's a floating-point type I don't see any good way to do this.

Answer 10

bdonlan's replay is spot on but keep in mind that you can perform nearly any optimization you chose on the compile box provided you are willing to parse and analyze the code in your own custom preprocessor. It is a trivial task in most version of unix to override the implicit rules that call the compiler to call a custom step of your own before it hits the compiler.