From owner-freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug 25 02:51:13 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBCB61000
 for <freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 02:51:13 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu
 [128.95.76.21])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DE50225D
 for <freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 25 Aug 2013 02:51:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu
 [127.0.0.1])
 by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id r7P2pCBN056878; 
 Sat, 24 Aug 2013 19:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
 (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu)
Received: (from sgk@localhost)
 by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id r7P2pCIQ056877;
 Sat, 24 Aug 2013 19:51:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk)
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 19:51:12 -0700
From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
To: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
Subject: Re: (2nd time) tweaks to erff() threshold values
Message-ID: <20130825025112.GA56868@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
References: <20130822213315.GA6708@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <20130823202257.Q1593@besplex.bde.org>
 <20130823165744.GA47369@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <20130824202102.GA54981@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
 <20130825023029.GA56772@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130825023029.GA56772@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
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."
 <freebsd-numerics.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-numerics>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-numerics>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-numerics>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 02:51:13 -0000

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 07:30:29PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 01:21:02PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 09:57:44AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 09:12:33PM +1000, Bruce Evans wrote:
> > > 
> > >> The whole erf implementation is probably not the best way for
> > >> float precision, but is good for understanding higher precisions.
> > > 
> > > I'm fairly certain that the implementation of erff() is not very
> > > efficient.  The polynomials, used in the rational approximations,
> > > are the same order as those used in the double precision approximation.
> > > I'll check the polys when update my P(x)/Q(x) remes algorithm for
> > > erfl and erfcl.
> > 
> > I seem to be right (although I haven't iterated on the P's and Q's).
> > 
> 
> Now, with pretty testing and (perhaps) better coefficients:
> 

LMAO.  I have not idea where "pretty" came from.  s/pretty/better
-- 
Steve