Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:58:32 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com> To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Cc: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of expl logl Message-ID: <20120814235832.GC33399@server.rulingia.com> In-Reply-To: <20120815070807.B3431@besplex.bde.org> References: <502A8CCC.5080606@missouri.edu> <20120814175257.GA69865@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20120814183518.GA70092@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <502AA971.4010403@missouri.edu> <20120814195659.GA70571@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20120815070807.B3431@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2012-Aug-15 08:15:52 +1000, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >I hardly looked at e_pow.c before. It is apparently half about repeating >e_log.c and e_exp.c, to get at their extra internal precision. I expect cpow() will similarly have to copy slabs of code from e_pow.c to avoid losing precision or domain. Is it worth pulling some of this "common" code out so that it can be shared amongst all the different functions that need it? --=20 Peter Jeremy --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlAq5igACgkQ/opHv/APuId46wCghPMSIsmybG9yPbkBaXib2iBW O6AAn1pN52NokWGks8qs9tG6/2/csbiN =2gzD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --k1lZvvs/B4yU6o8G--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120814235832.GC33399>