From owner-freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org  Wed Feb  8 11:38:48 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-numerics@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551C5CD6C8F
 for <freebsd-numerics@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed,  8 Feb 2017 11:38:48 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au)
Received: from mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au
 [211.29.132.249])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2059C1097
 for <freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org>; Wed,  8 Feb 2017 11:38:48 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au)
Received: from besplex.bde.org (c122-106-153-191.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au
 [122.106.153.191])
 by mail105.syd.optusnet.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 779261048403;
 Wed,  8 Feb 2017 22:38:40 +1100 (AEDT)
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 22:38:39 +1100 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@besplex.bde.org
To: mokhi <mokhi64@gmail.com>
cc: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: C11 conformance of casinl-like functions.
In-Reply-To: <CAByVWPUvbG78nUoxQQAOTTY9dJa1agjCZo9oO3dShv2U8Q=y0A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20170208221449.K14261@besplex.bde.org>
References: <CAByVWPUvbG78nUoxQQAOTTY9dJa1agjCZo9oO3dShv2U8Q=y0A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Optus-CM-Score: 0
X-Optus-CM-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=BKLDlBYG c=1 sm=1 tr=0
 a=Tj3pCpwHnMupdyZSltBt7Q==:117 a=Tj3pCpwHnMupdyZSltBt7Q==:17
 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=ofqOCum91nHaNWPVwLQA:9
 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22
X-BeenThere: freebsd-numerics@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of high quality implementation of libm functions."
 <freebsd-numerics.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-numerics>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-numerics-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:38:48 -0000

On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, mokhi wrote:

> I recently saw bunch of PRs opened about C11 lack of conformance in
> FreeBSD on Bugzilla, complaining cosinl, acosinl, ... not implemented.

I think you mean acosl, asinl, ...

These were implemented quite well in 2012-2013, but not quite finished,
and not committed.  Only the float and double version were committed.
The raw versions are still available in
https://people.freebsd.org/~stephen/catrig*.c.  These have rotted and
require some editing.  Compare with the committed parts to see most
of the necessary editing.

> I've searched about these and I found documents about them too[2][3].
> Do you think we should implement them? Or standards doesn't have
> suggestions on these?
>
> If yes (you think we should implement them), would you suggest simply
> `strong aliasing symbols of FUNC_l to FUNC`?

They cannot be implemented by aliasing (except on arches which don't
have real long doubles).  Bad versions can be implemented using wrappers.
Bad versions are worse than none IMO.

> or implementing FUNC_l
> from scratch?

It would be hard to do better than the 2012-2013 implementation.

Bruce