From owner-freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Aug 15 15:39:58 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0FEC1065677
	for <freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:39:58 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au)
Received: from mail01.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail01.syd.optusnet.com.au
	[211.29.132.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 403C28FC12
	for <freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:39:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from c122-106-171-246.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au
	(c122-106-171-246.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [122.106.171.246])
	by mail01.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id
	q7FFdmxP023395
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Thu, 16 Aug 2012 01:39:50 +1000
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 01:39:48 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org
To: Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120814235832.GC33399@server.rulingia.com>
Message-ID: <20120816012258.U2233@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>
	<20120814235832.GC33399@server.rulingia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Status of expl logl
X-BeenThere: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of high quality implementation of libm functions."
	<freebsd-numerics.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-numerics>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-numerics>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-numerics>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:39:58 -0000

On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Peter Jeremy wrote:

> 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?

We already have kernels for exp and log, but it is difficult to find
the right interfaces and internals, and these don't have them.  There
are also __exp__D() and  __log__D().  My s_log*.c have yet another
interface.  With heavyweight inlining and optimization, it works OK
to return internals in a big struct, with flags saying what was
returned.  However, the compiler never seems to do quite as well as
manual inlining.

Bruce