Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 13 Jul 2012 08:18:38 -0400
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Cc:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Diane Bruce <db@db.net>, Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com>, David Schultz <das@freebsd.org>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
Subject:   Re: Use of C99 extra long double math functions after r236148
Message-ID:  <201207130818.38535.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120713114100.GB83006@server.rulingia.com>
References:  <20120529045612.GB4445@server.rulingia.com> <20120711223247.GA9964@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20120713114100.GB83006@server.rulingia.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, July 13, 2012 7:41:00 am Peter Jeremy wrote:
> AFAIK, none of the relevant standards (POSIX, IEEE754) have any
> precision requirements for functions other than +-*/ and sqrt() - all
> of which we have correctly implemented.  I therefore believe that, for
> the remaining missing functions, the Project would be best served by
> committing the best code that is currently available under a suitable
> license and cleaning it up over time (as was done for the current
> libm).

I concur.  However, are there any patches that we can commit now?  It
seems that there are some things that could go into the tree now that
will certainly reduce the concerns of the R folk.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201207130818.38535.jhb>