Aw: Re: TR1 Special Math

["Florian Goth" <CaptainSifff at gmx dot de>]

Hi all,
just a quick note that I'm still around...
Any particular pointers how I can help in improving the implementation?
Cheers,
Florian.

> Gesendet: Samstag, 14. November 2015 um 21:40 Uhr
> Von: "Ed Smith-Rowland" <3dw4rd@verizon.net>
> An: "Jonathan Wakely" <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com>
> Cc: libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, "Florian Goth" <CaptainSifff@gmx.de>
> Betreff: Re: TR1 Special Math
>
> On 11/14/2015 03:28 PM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
> > On 11/13/2015 11:20 AM, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
> >> On 11/13/2015 10:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>> On 25 October 2015 at 20:48, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> On 25 October 2015 at 17:46, Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd@verizon.net> 
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> On 10/24/2015 11:38 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8 May 2015 at 15:05, Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 05/07/2015 12:06 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi Ed,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The C++ committee is considering the
> >>>>>>>> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/n4437.pdf
> >>>>>>>> proposal to make C++17 include the contents of ISO 29124:2010 (the
> >>>>>>>> special math functions from TR1 that went into a separate 
> >>>>>>>> standard,
> >>>>>>>> not into C++11).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What is the status of our TR1 implementation? Is it complete? Good
> >>>>>>>> enough quality to move out of the tr1 sub-dir?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Even if N4437 isn't accepted for C++17 we could move things 
> >>>>>>>> around to
> >>>>>>>> turn the TR1 code into an iso29124 implementation, do you think 
> >>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>> would make sense?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That would make absolute sense.
> >>>>>>> I actually have a tree where I've done that.
> >>>>>>> All the functions are in there (29124 removed the hypergeometric
> >>>>>>> functions.
> >>>>>>> I'd like to keep those as extensions.
> >>>>>>> I have some bugfixes also.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I have a better version of the Carlson elliptic functions (which 
> >>>>>>> are used
> >>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>> the 29124 elliptic functions).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ed
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Ed, Florian,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's a patch to re-use the TR1 math functions to implement IS 
> >>>>>> 29124,
> >>>>>> what do you think of this approach? Ed, were you just going to copy
> >>>>>> the files and have duplicated code?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We should probably uglify the names of the hypergeometric 
> >>>>>> functions if
> >>>>>> they are not in the final standard.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This doesn't include Florian's patch, which should be applied.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (I want to get this done before stage 1 ends in a couple of 
> >>>>>> weeks, so
> >>>>>> am posting this for review now, but I'll be unavailable for the next
> >>>>>> week or two and might not be able to actually commit anything until
> >>>>>> stage 3).
> >>>>> Hi all!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am actually very aware of the stage 1 deadline and am working 
> >>>>> furiously!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This patch adds the hypergeometric and confluent hypergeometric 
> >>>>> functions
> >>>>> that were actually stricken fromTR29124.
> >>>>> I actually had a mind to add those back especially since the 
> >>>>> confluent one
> >>>>> is actually pretty stable in it's realm and is used in some 
> >>>>> statistics
> >>>>> tests.
> >>>>> I expect that some people have ventures to use both and so TR29129 
> >>>>> would not
> >>>>> be a full replacement for TR1 without them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I intend to post within the next few days.  I have to realize that 
> >>>>> some of
> >>>>> my hopes and dreams would be better done with these in tree! ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you for lighting a fire Jonathan!
> >>>> Excellent, glad to hear you're on this, as you know the code and the
> >>>> specs, whereas I'm poking around blindly :-)
> >>> Hi Ed,
> >>>
> >>> Have you been able to find enough time to work on this?
> >>>
> >>> Will you be able to make the stage 1 deadline tomorrow, and if not, do
> >>> you think I should apply my patch to re-use the TR1 stuff? (We can
> >>> apply Florian's bug fix to that as well).
> >>>
> >> I'm going to post something in a few hours.
> >>
> >>
> > OK,
> >
> > this is still testing but I wanted to get it in under the deadline.
> > It is basically a combination of Jonathan's approach using TR1 (which 
> > I do for C++03)
> > Plus the start of a new impl in bits.
> > Plus patches from Florian.
> >
> > Ed
> >
> >
> The last patchwas missing some tests.
> I'm also going to bzip it - I realized it was huge.
> 
>