Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 21:00:23 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: casinh function accuracy problem On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:46:08AM +1100, Damian McGuckin wrote: > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Rich Felker wrote: > > >High-quality complex math functions are a long-term wishlist item for > >musl but nobody has stepped up to do them and I don't really feel like > >doing it, at least not over other improvements I could be working on. > > As you say, they do work reasonably well even now. > > With even complex arithmetic being "unspecified" in IEEE-754-2019, > it is an interesting issue where "interesting" does not have the > conventional English sense of being a positive thing. > > >This might be an area well-served by sponsored enhancement if there's > >a user who needs them improved with resources to pay someone to do it. > > Depending on your definition of "improved", it is anything from a > big task to a huge task. > > And sadly, I have other things on my plate too. My minimal criterion for large-scale improvements of src/complex would be fixing any remaining cases where inf/nan behavior is badly wrong or there's catastrophic error (>2^52 ulp, or even just >2^20 ulp or so). Beyond that, I think "reducing ulp error" would be nice but hard to quantify and make a goal without having an idea how bad it is now, not to mention without having rigorous error bounds on the real math library functions. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.