Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Oct 2012 08:35:17 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
Cc:        svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Warner Losh <imp@FreeBSD.org>, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r241755 - head/lib/msun/src
Message-ID:  <45589524-E249-43E3-91B7-6A78068208AD@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20121022134003.GA52156@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
References:  <201210192246.q9JMkm4R092929@svn.freebsd.org> <20121020150917.I1095@besplex.bde.org> <18177777-6EE0-4103-98B0-272EFF98FE96@bsdimp.com> <20121022040651.GA49632@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <B3BBD842-59C1-46FB-8E83-9DED9657A4D9@bsdimp.com> <20121022134003.GA52156@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Oct 22, 2012, at 7:40 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 06:59:04AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
>>=20
>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 10:06 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>=20
>>> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 09:08:49PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>> Feel free to fix them however.  I added the comments because
>>>> the algorithms weren't quite the same...  If you have a better
>>>> way, feel free to back my stuff out on the way to it.
>>>>=20
>>>> Warner
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Please back your commits out.=20
>>>=20
>>> Two of the three people who actually appear to be
>>> working on libm have now requested the back-out.
>>=20
>> OK.  While it would be just as easy for you guys to commit the new =
stuff over mine, I'll revert them.
>>=20
>> Warner
>>=20
>=20
> Thanks.
>=20
> BTW, besides bde's technical points, your change made
> our sources different from OpenBSD, NetBSD, and new
> project openlibm.  Diffing against the other trees
> would become cluttered.

BDE's technical points vary in quality and are difficult to argue with =
since they are so nit-picky. :(  I'd be happy to work through them, but =
some of the issues I just fundamentally disagree with.  Since I backed =
out the comments, I've decided not to spend the time arguing, but do =
think that documenting the differences between the precisions would be =
good.  I started down this path because I thought expf was broken =
because it didn't match exp exactly...

However, since he's implementing a new one, wouldn't that also have =
diffability issues too?

Warner=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45589524-E249-43E3-91B7-6A78068208AD>