From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 27 14:50:07 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7DE1065673 for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:50:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 682B88FC21 for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:50:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6REo7tF062818 for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:50:07 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q6REo7p0062817; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:50:07 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:50:07 GMT Message-Id: <201207271450.q6REo7p0062817@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith Cc: Subject: Re: bin/170206: complex arcsinh, log, etc. X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:50:07 -0000 The following reply was made to PR bin/170206; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith To: Bruce Evans Cc: Stephen Montgomery-Smith , FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bin/170206: complex arcsinh, log, etc. Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:45:02 -0500 On 07/27/2012 09:26 AM, Bruce Evans wrote: > % hm1 = -1; > % for (i=0;i<12;i++) hm1 += val[i]; > % return (cpack(0.5 * log1p(hm1), atan2(y, x))); > > It is the trailing terms that I think don't work right here. You sort > them and add from high to low, but normally it is necessary to add > from low to high (consider terms [1, DBL_EPSILON/2, DBL_EPSILON/4]). > Adding from high to low cancels with the -1 term, but then only > particular values work right. Also, I don't see how adding the low > terms without extra precision preserves enough precision. I understand what you are saying. But in this case adding in order of smallest to largest (adding -1 last) won't work. If all the signs in the same direction, it would work. But -1 has the wrong sign. But I can also tell you that I haven't thought my algorithm through every special case. I can tell you it seems to work in all the examples I tried. But I don't have a mathematical proof.