Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 8:49 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Meh. As I said before, we're not in the business of improving on what >> libm does --- if someone has a beef with the results, they need to take >> it to their platform's libm maintainer, not us. The point of testing >> this at all is just to ensure that we've wired up the SQL functions >> to the library functions correctly.
> Pretty sure we don't even need a test for that. asinh() isn't going > to call creat() by mistake. No, but that's not the hazard. I have a very fresh-in-mind example: at one point while tweaking Laetitia's patch, I'd accidentally changed datanh so that it called tanh not atanh. The previous set of tests did not reveal that :-( regards, tom lane