Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:07:55 -0500 From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@missouri.edu> To: David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>, Diane Bruce <db@db.net>, Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: Use of C99 extra long double math functions after r236148 Message-ID: <500047DB.60607@missouri.edu> In-Reply-To: <20120713155805.GC81965@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <20120529045612.GB4445@server.rulingia.com> <20120711223247.GA9964@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20120713114100.GB83006@server.rulingia.com> <201207130818.38535.jhb@freebsd.org> <9EB2DA4F-19D7-4BA5-8811-D9451CB1D907@theravensnest.org> <C527B388-3537-406F-BA6D-2FA45B9EAA3B@FreeBSD.org> <20120713155805.GC81965@zim.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/13/12 10:58, David Schultz wrote: > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012, David Chisnall wrote: >> As do I. I'd also point out that the ONLY requirement for long >> double according to the standard is that it has at least the same >> precision as double. Therefore, any implementation of these >> functions that is no worse that the double version is compliant. >> Once we have something meeting a minimum standard, then I'm very >> happy to see it improved, but having C99 functions missing now is >> just embarrassing while we're working on adding C11 features. > > There are several things wrong with this reasoning, but pragmatically > the conclusion may be right: we do have a long list of users who would > prefer a dubious implementation to none at all. > > I propose we set a timeframe for this, on the order of a few months. > A rough outline might be something like: > > mid-August: expl logl log2l log10l > -- just need to clean up Bruce and Steve's work; Steve recently > sent me patches for expl, which I hope get committed soon > mid-September: acoshl asinhl atanhl coshl sinhl tanhl > -- easy once expl is in; others could probably help > mid-October: powl expm1l > mid-November: most complex.h functions > > If the schedule can't be met, then we can just import Cephes as an > interim solution without further ado. This provides Bruce and Steve > an opportunity to commit what they have been working on, without > forcing the rest of the FreeBSD community to wait indefinitely for > the pie in the sky. This sounds fantastic. > By the way, the trig and complex functions are areas where anyone with > some calculus background could contribute. If anyone is interested in > helping out, I'd be happy to coordinate things and review patches, > although I will be unavailable for much of August. I would be happy to help. Just give me a sense of direction of what I should try and work on, when and as you are ready.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?500047DB.60607>