From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 14 22:35:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA13740 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:35:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from chen.ml.org (luoqi.watermarkgroup.com [207.202.73.170]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA13726 for ; Thu, 14 May 1998 22:35:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from luoqi@chen.ml.org) Received: (from luoqi@localhost) by chen.ml.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA05452 for hackers@freebsd.org; Fri, 15 May 1998 01:35:26 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from luoqi) Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 01:35:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Luoqi Chen Message-Id: <199805150535.BAA05452@chen.ml.org> To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Why is expm1() not implemented using f2xm1 i387 instruction? Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I am working on a number crunching program which makes numerous calls to expm1(). I checked its implementation in msun, I was surprised that it's not implemented with the f2xm1 i387 instruction, yet exp() is. I wonder if there is any reason why the C implementation is preferred over the FPU instruction? -lq To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message