Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2018 11:38:53 -0700 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: Matthew Macy <mat.macy@gmail.com> Cc: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Recent libm additions Message-ID: <20180715183853.GD31164@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <CAPrugNrBNFXEtQxwu7023U8NRVm%2BdutTSjjtetKbFv-w1fEeKQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <20180715150638.GA30154@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <1531674041.26036.1.camel@freebsd.org> <20180715171737.GA31164@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <CAPrugNrBNFXEtQxwu7023U8NRVm%2BdutTSjjtetKbFv-w1fEeKQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 10:44:28AM -0700, Matthew Macy wrote: > > In the bug report you cite, Chris Lattner states: "This is actually an > unspecified feature of C99 (whether it supports the _Imaginary type). > It is desirable to support this, but not a regression. > Chris Lattner is wrong when the use of I in an express gives the wrong answer. He can claim Annex F and G are non-normative, but a wrong answer is still wrong. Go read msun/src/math_private.h. FreeBSD clearly does not use I in libm code, because it has consequences for floating point numerical code. -- Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180715183853.GD31164>