Re: [OT] __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))

[Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>]

Duncan Sands wrote:
> 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.