From owner-freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 30 20:35:21 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3565F322 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 20:35:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from nm18.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm18.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.90.81]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3D7641 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 20:35:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [98.138.226.179] by nm18.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 May 2013 20:32:02 -0000 Received: from [98.138.226.61] by tm14.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 May 2013 20:32:02 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp212.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 30 May 2013 20:32:02 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 634308.14639.bm@smtp212.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: ZY7iBa0VM1no4wHSbRqynOmrw02iYuqXod4iGts_ae69c3e 6Mkfz75YLdkCro9ZbEPV9rrRTQWaYg3yr8_lJLxQdN668cbTG.t9KijWXqPI zSJyAaz.uZiOqJuXnOeQYxH.expwxcbCtuebP3VWHEFyz0gdiSvNCnQ.uy_S PgPrHHXOAermSQI2rDVEsBJTLd6kLbtgvuJBxM0E3MVueUGxK3Jp4YDjRc4Q jLjraFv7.eGFXtRo9Ky0KphA9GcHbLuYW.IzVX2pI7zFUwfbaXTxSHisrYCS l0O9ILZXXsBAcfEbyIqYkTQJFfsZzxgX7ypGJFwomKa.bZu6Chn8ChTekKrZ SF5dAREoZDzd9PbORxqpjsCDzTc0q99Onmh6DVVGMEUnSNMb0x6td.MNiANs yfrz_e_f9l3eBe9I2QIPiAcRYqz82wMBVGbvOWCJqb0jovlnUDzCsfubfVt0 E3fN_7HA0YAGsEEu6HFlMZhqLB4RSi1ZfVjEo7.XqRlCV96Cw7MLMtph1ahL k63QeN7eWx6ocSVrO6wx95EeEaLfwzrV6mu5cXMqsYq9Fm1ngJZp3n8xsKDI Gs451yYNnZTQXNbw- X-Yahoo-SMTP: xcjD0guswBAZaPPIbxpWwLcp9Unf X-Rocket-Received: from [192.168.0.102] (pfg@190.157.126.109 with ) by smtp212.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 30 May 2013 13:32:02 -0700 PDT Message-ID: <51A7B73F.8040409@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 15:31:59 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130407 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Kargl Subject: Re: standards/175811: libstdc++ needs complex support in order use C99 References: <201302040328.r143SUd3039504@freefall.freebsd.org> <510F306A.6090009@missouri.edu> <20130530064635.GA91597@zim.MIT.EDU> <51A77324.2070702@FreeBSD.org> <20130530171348.GA67170@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <51A7ABF7.6060807@FreeBSD.org> <20130530201513.GA68512@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <20130530201513.GA68512@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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: Thu, 30 May 2013 20:35:21 -0000 On 30.05.2013 15:15, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 02:43:51PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >> On 30.05.2013 12:13, Steve Kargl wrote: >>> C99 defines many long double functions. Anyone wanting >>> to use C and libm, and not C++ and boost, will need >>> quality implementations of these functions. Of course, >>> the lack of any actual C99 compiler tends to dampen >>> this argument. >>> >>> What I find appalling is reading "people are tired >>> of the situation with libm, so I'm going to commit >>> some atrocious hack". The proper response should be >>> "so I'm going to help implement and test the missing >>> functionality". It's unfortunate that only a few >>> individuals are working to fix libm, but such is >>> life. >>> >> I guess I was trying to hint that Boost is a good >> place to look at to get ideas for the implementations >> for such stuff. Stephen knows this well though since >> he actually fixed some complex functions in boost :). >> > Boost might be a good place to look for implementation > ideas. Looking at the msun code also works. As does > searching with google. This is all secondary to the > real issue. The real problem is no one is willing to > step forward to actually help write and test the code. > Everyone seems to be waiting (and complaining!) for > someone else to do the work. I've been chipping away at > libm issues since 2003, and given my available free time > I should have a fully compliant C99 libm around 2025 or > so. > And it happens all around the tree ... The guys fixing clang seem pretty overloaded too. We really need a better installer, and to add more DTrace providers and while here more filesystems ... it never stops and we are all just volunteers. All in all, feedback is not necessarily a bad thing. Even if there are few heroic developers working on it, it would help to have a list of open tasks like this: http://www.freebsd.org/projects/c99/ so that someone asking about the status is just pointed there and gets the picture. Just my $0.02, sorry that I am busy with other stuff. Pedro.