Re: libm

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:35:00PM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
 > > (1) libm is horribly non-KNF; my understanding is that at one time it
 > > had an upstream of sorts which is why it's the way it is, but it
 > > doesn't any more so there's no longer any reason to humour this. Is
 > > that correct?
 > 
 > I think so too. But there still remains benefit to keep its style, because
 > FreeBSD also keeps it. FreeBSD has heavily improved their libm. They have
 > many long double functions, that are missing in ours. Also, many bug fixes
 > have been made, cf., lib/50698.

Then we should take everything applicable from them first before
moving ahead...

 > > (2) does anyone who knows floating-point stuff well (which I don't)
 > > want to collaborate with me on a general cleanup and rototill? (a real
 > > one, not just reformatting everything)
 > 
 > Unfortunately, I don't have enough knowledge of floating-point arithmetic.
 > I guess that FreeBSD's libm should be useful code base to improve ours.

Yes, me either, that's why I'm fishing for someone to work with :-/

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost