On 13 Jul 2012, at 13:18, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday, July 13, 2012 7:41:00 am Peter Jeremy wrote: >> AFAIK, none of the relevant standards (POSIX, IEEE754) have any >> precision requirements for functions other than +-*/ and sqrt() - all >> of which we have correctly implemented. I therefore believe that, for >> the remaining missing functions, the Project would be best served by >> committing the best code that is currently available under a suitable >> license and cleaning it up over time (as was done for the current >> libm). > > I concur.
As do I. I'd also point out that the ONLY requirement for long double according to the standard is that it has at least the same precision as double. Therefore, any implementation of these functions that is no worse that the double version is compliant. Once we have something meeting a minimum standard, then I'm very happy to see it improved, but having C99 functions missing now is just embarrassing while we're working on adding C11 features. David P.S. Someone said earlier that our clang still lacks some C99 features. Please point me at the relevant clang PRs and I'll be happy to work on them. There are quite a few open issues for C11 support, but C99 is, as far as I know, done. _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
