From owner-freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org Wed Feb 8 14:14:00 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-numerics@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38C1CD6760 for ; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 14:14:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.249]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 895401799 for ; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 14:13:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from besplex.bde.org (c122-106-153-191.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [122.106.153.191]) by mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DCF6104776E; Thu, 9 Feb 2017 01:13:57 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 01:13:56 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org To: mokhi cc: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org Subject: Re: C11 conformance of casinl-like functions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20170209010941.J16975@besplex.bde.org> References: <20170208221449.K14261@besplex.bde.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Optus-CM-Score: 0 X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=c+HbeV1l c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=Tj3pCpwHnMupdyZSltBt7Q==:117 a=Tj3pCpwHnMupdyZSltBt7Q==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=-w7s6v8T-rG7N3JJM4kA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 X-BeenThere: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussions of high quality implementation of libm functions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 14:14:00 -0000 On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, mokhi wrote: >> I think you mean acosl, asinl, ... > yeah :D > >> These were implemented quite well in 2012-2013, but not quite finished, >> and not committed. Only the float and double version were committed. >> The raw versions are still available in >> https://people.freebsd.org/~stephen/catrig*.c. These have rotted and >> require some editing. Compare with the committed parts to see most >> of the necessary editing. > Okay, I'll do. > Would you like that I add you on Phabricator for reviewing when my > editing is done? Only put it on Phabricator if you want me to not see it. This list was supposed to be for specialized review[er]s but doesn't have enough writers to be very useful. Bruce