This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Accuracy of Mathematical Functions in Single Precision for glibc 2.31
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: paul zimmermann <Paul dot Zimmermann at inria dot fr>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 20:52:07 +0000
- Subject: Re: Accuracy of Mathematical Functions in Single Precision for glibc 2.31
- Ironport-sdr: vSXzu4vpVk+PAy9NnWI9VHhAT8ljdC/Ddwgq+Y9ajkPI0cUhTLm+As4vb+ULjAfGm+WSt0dnLa JsfHH/YrfhIK9C1amb8pEREovVtpL/gXhtbQM2/mwGQdo+BpgjUiyIV3ppgkJwqfYueBE3WrDI quxKxNs1oVXYdfITjhJ8v9WPG3ON4ooLkcR1xfVN9pDJoFQyyzHwQyYuXtdfNY+MIv7w4R9zIS y6a6lFxr8P/pK0SAWbc04hQ0ZgWk5+f1GnnlEpXgDvq7Mv4mYR8YbO4DtQU8uiXn2umAGtdVx3 ttg=
- Ironport-sdr: 4B7fxAPa0enq2ve4MRKmZO9994yNXfateM5DkJKuDE00vKUAMFxf9r9PDZzi215a1ZFZUlTHxl AZkqiFLP0P/A==
- References: <mwwo94nprv.fsf@barbecue.loria.fr>
On Mon, 3 Feb 2020, paul zimmermann wrote:
> https://homepages.loria.fr/PZimmermann/glibc/glibc231.pdf
lgamma testing should compare with mpfr_lgamma not mpfr_lngamma.
> - exp10 is close from being correctly rounded (only one exception)
That's an artifact of the simplistic implementation. I expect it would be
substantially faster if exp10f had an implementation along the lines of
the expf / exp2f implementations rather than a wrapper round
double-precision exp, at which point the accuracy would be similar to that
of expf and exp2f.
> - j0, j1, y0, y1 are quite bad (this was already known, but the "Known
> Maximum Errors in Math Functions" in the reference manual do not reflect it)
jn, yn, cpow are also known to have cases with large errors, but aren't
covered by this testing because they aren't functions of a single real
floating argument so aren't feasible to test exhaustively.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com