This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: TR1 Math Special Functions


Hi again,

Here is another drop.

It is completely reworked relative to the last one.

IMHO, very good progress, indeed.


I just finished regtesting on x86_64-linux and got the following 4 failures:

check_value.exe: */tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/01_assoc_laguerre/check_value.cc:2143: void test049() [with Tp = double]: Assertion `max_abs_frac < Tp(0.002)' failed.
FAIL: tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/01_assoc_laguerre/check_value.cc execution test


check_value.exe: */tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/17_hyperg/check_value.cc:4336: void test086() [with Tp = double]: Assertion `max_abs_frac < Tp(0.002)' failed.
FAIL: tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/17_hyperg/check_value.cc execution test


check_value.exe: */tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/18_laguerre/check_value.cc:400: void test007() [with Tp = double]: Assertion `max_abs_frac < Tp(0.002)' failed.
FAIL: tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/18_laguerre/check_value.cc execution test


check_value.exe: */tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/22_sph_legendre/check_value.cc:1202: void test022() [with Tp = double]: Assertion `max_abs_frac < Tp(2.0000000000000016e-14)' failed.
FAIL: tr1/5_numerical_facilities/special_functions/22_sph_legendre/check_value.cc execution test


Besides that, before we can do the first commit, I can see one blocker issue (really, because affects the bootstrap itself, on some targets): you are using in many places std::isnan, which, in fact, is only available if the target supports the C99 math facilities (grep tr1/cmath about isnan & co, about that). What do you suggest? As a stopgap solution we could also disable completely the affected code (but I appreciate your efforts with tgamma, elsewhere... )

Otherwise, I see un-uglified names in struct __numeric_constants, it would be nice if you could take care of that and well, of course double check that you are not using unconditionally any other C99 facility (configuring --disable-c99 should help here). But I can take care of these trivial things, in order to speed-up the process, if you are willing to look into the above more substantive ones.

Many thanks for your patience with the various issues, I think we are quickly converging to code ready for the first commit, really. I look forward to the next, i.e., last, iteration...

Paolo.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]