Revised versions of parts 3 and 4 are now available:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1789.pdf
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1790.pdf
(note that these are not yet expected to address all comments on the
previous versions; see also N1791 and N1792, with minutes
On 2014-01-07 16:45:49 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Sure, such a correctly rounded function is useful just like correctly
rounded versions of other functions. The proposed C bindings reserve cr*
names *only* for the specific functions listed in 9.2 where IEEE 754
recommends correctly
On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2014-01-07 16:45:49 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
Sure, such a correctly rounded function is useful just like correctly
rounded versions of other functions. The proposed C bindings reserve cr*
names *only* for the specific functions listed
On 2014-01-08 13:31:40 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
I advise making such suggestions direct to WG14. (I don't know if such
names should be reserved for correctly rounded complex arithmetic as well
- where ordinary complex multiplication and division are not expected to
be correctly
On 01/04/2014 07:21 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
FYI: a draft set of C bindings for additional floating-point functions
from IEEE 754-2008 are now available (draft TS 18661-4):
Is there an accurate summary of IEEE 754-2008 available online?
I'm asking because IEEE 754 is widely quoted, but
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 01/04/2014 07:21 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
FYI: a draft set of C bindings for additional floating-point functions
from IEEE 754-2008 are now available (draft TS 18661-4):
Is there an accurate summary of IEEE 754-2008 available online?
No.
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
The IEEE 754 operations are corrected rounded. However, the C bindings
(Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
an implementation-defined approximation. But 9.2 is Recommended
correctly rounded functions, e.g. exp
On 01/07/2014 02:48 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
The IEEE 754 operations are corrected rounded. However, the C bindings
(Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
an implementation-defined approximation. But 9.2 is
On 2014-01-07 14:36:58 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
(As far as I know, the state of the art on exhaustive searches for
worst cases for correct rounding - as needed to implement correctly
rounded transcendental functions with bounded resource use - does
not make such searches feasible for IEEE
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
For some of them, this is proved. Here's a summary of the current
status:
http://tamadiwiki.ens-lyon.fr/tamadiwiki/images/c/c1/Lefevre2013.pdf
Thanks for the details. What's the current state of the art on the
asymptotic cost of the exhaustive
On 2014-01-07 14:48:01 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
(Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
an implementation-defined approximation. But 9.2 is Recommended
correctly rounded functions, e.g. exp and sin, for which the strictly
corresponding C functions are
On 2014-01-07 16:18:48 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
For some of them, this is proved. Here's a summary of the current
status:
http://tamadiwiki.ens-lyon.fr/tamadiwiki/images/c/c1/Lefevre2013.pdf
Thanks for the details. What's the
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2014-01-07 14:48:01 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
(Except that the IEEE 754 reduction operations - subclause 9.4 - return
an implementation-defined approximation. But 9.2 is Recommended
correctly rounded functions, e.g. exp and sin, for
13 matches
Mail list logo
