Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 17:51:29 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-numerics@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>, "current@freebsd.org Current" <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: clang+libc++ using missing powl Message-ID: <771A7CDD-CE0C-45DE-9367-6E1C3E43A30C@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20130906155939.GA63661@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20130904223842.GB82066@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <80062343-53CD-4CEF-9C47-3BF614DADB64@FreeBSD.org> <20130905210953.GA58413@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <4DF3383B-4BE7-4947-886A-AAAD25172F68@freebsd.org> <20130906155939.GA63661@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6 Sep 2013, at 16:59, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> = wrote: > Well, your commit has pre-empted any discussion on whether > there would have been a better kludge. Oh well. I'm very happy for it to be replaced by something better (and would be = ecstatic for it to go away completely and for all of the functions to = have full-precision implementations). > Concerning coshl, sinhl, and tanhl. I had integrated bde's > code into msun and prepared a patch to commit over a week ago. > Unfortunately, my testing on sparc64 revealed a few issues > with tanhl, and Bruce and I are still discussing the fix. Good to hear. > PS: I have working erfl and erfcl for ld80 archs. I'm still > testing and refining the code. It turns out that computing > the needed rational approximation is fairly difficult (at least > for me). That's great too. Please do poke re@ about committing these after the code freeze if = they're done before 10.0 ships. It would be great to have them in for = the release. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?771A7CDD-CE0C-45DE-9367-6E1C3E43A30C>