On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:35:00PM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote: > > (1) libm is horribly non-KNF; my understanding is that at one time it > > had an upstream of sorts which is why it's the way it is, but it > > doesn't any more so there's no longer any reason to humour this. Is > > that correct? > > I think so too. But there still remains benefit to keep its style, because > FreeBSD also keeps it. FreeBSD has heavily improved their libm. They have > many long double functions, that are missing in ours. Also, many bug fixes > have been made, cf., lib/50698.
Then we should take everything applicable from them first before moving ahead... > > (2) does anyone who knows floating-point stuff well (which I don't) > > want to collaborate with me on a general cleanup and rototill? (a real > > one, not just reformatting everything) > > Unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge of floating-point arithmetic. > I guess that FreeBSD's libm should be useful code base to improve ours. Yes, me either, that's why I'm fishing for someone to work with :-/ -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
