Re: libm update plans?

[Chris Turner <c.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Matthew Dillon wrote:

> 
>     I looked for various pieces of example code.  FreeBSD has a really
>     old implementation in (libmsun) which is not suitable, and NetBSD uses
>     the same implementation.  Gnu seems to have a clean 4-line implementation
>     done in 2005:
> 
>     http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-05/msg00227.html

1) haven't read this yet, to keep ye-olde eyes clean :)
2) just assumed that since DF was rebasing things from netbsd
   (based on df commit messages), that this was added new after the fact

good summary of netbsd's changes here:

http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libm/shlib_version

although based on a quick glance at:

http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libm/src/s_floor.c
($NetBSD$ v1.11)

http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/lib/libm/src/s_trunc.c

($NetBSD$ v1.2)

http://www.netlib.org/fdlibm/fdlibm.h

( /* @(#)fdlibm.h 1.5 04/04/22 */ )

and

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/lib/msun/src/s_trunc.c

($FreeBSD$ v1.1)

It looks like this was a fresh implementeation for FBSD 5 using
a similar structure (and misnamed header) from the s_floor.c
brought in to netbsd since 3.x release

aside from all the various conditionals, length, and so on,
what do you find unsuitable about this version?

gak!

the whole point of mentioning it was so I didn't spend hours doing
this ^ .. oh well. that's what I get for being lazy - hopefully some
good will come of it.

>
>     Are you sure this is part of C99?

was shamefully baseing this off of the GNU manpage on a linux box
(hence '?')..  anyhoo, someone did the real homework here..

Like I mentioned, this is further down in my list of priorities at the
moment (e.g. not-started external vkernel shutdown & other ideas, etc
much more fun) ..

Let me know if I should file a bug or similar to track things,
otherwise I'll probably leave in the back of my mind to gather dust.

Thanks,

- Chris