Hi Robert, > >>Well if you tell me there are people about there implementing cpow > >>with log and exp, that's enough for me to decide that Ada should > >>continue to stay away (the Ada RM has accuracy requirements that > >>would preclude a broken implementation of this kind) :-) > > > > > > the reference manual allows for a "relaxed mode", which doesn't have > > those accuracy requirements. I guess -ffast-math and the use of > > builtins would be appropriate in the relaxed mode. Do you plan to > > implement such a mode one day? > > > > Just curious. > > > > All the best, > > > > Duncan. > > No plans, but also note that the use of log/exp for ** besides > being horribly inaccurate, is also inefficient. Fast accurate > math is achievable, we don't see a need for a relaxed mode.
if the Ada front-end has an efficient, accurate implementation of x^y, wouldn't it make sense to move it to the back-end (__builtin_pow) so everyone can benefit? Ciao, Duncan.
