On 28.05.2012 14:49 (UTC+1), David Chisnall wrote:
On 28 May 2012, at 13:30, Rainer Hurling wrote:
On 28.05.2012 10:41 (UTC+1), David Chisnall wrote:
On 28 May 2012, at 05:35, Rainer Hurling wrote:
Ok, that's what I had supposed. Because the main difference between r236147 and
r2136148 seems to be the define of _MATH_EXTRA_H_, the rest is more a type of
binning?
Yes, it's just about making libc++'s cmath header compile, nothing more.
I see, thanks.
Yes, I agree. These outstanding long double math functions (like log1pl) and
better unicode support are really needed for some important third party
projects like R or SAGA GIS.
I very much doubt that anything is using the C11 unicode stuff yet, since no
compiler or libc currently supports it...
Of course you are right with C11 unicode stuff.
I thougt more about my actual problems to get the right charset
conversions between different apps, i.e. qgis <-> wxgtk29 <-> saga gis.
Or using Gnome apps (utf8) on windowmaker using ISO8859-15. But this is
OT here, sorry.
In the past I have read several times discussions about the correctness of long
double functions on FreeBSD. Some drafts have been dismissed because of there
inaccuracy in special cases. Also was discussed to get missing libm routines
from NetBSD [1]. It appears as if we have to wait some more time ...
I thought we did pull in some NetBSD libm stuff recently. Not sure what the
status of that is, you'd need to check with das@.
I am not aware of it and will have a look. But this did not implement
the missing long double functions.
Yes, I think in most cases math/R is tolerant enough of just using doubles. But
in the near future they plan to implement much more of the C99 stuff and their
tolerance to offer workarounds for FreeBSD shrinks from release to release [2].
So these problems will increase :-(
Reading that email, it seems that they would prefer a function that exists and
returns the wrong result to one that does not exist. If this is really the
attitude of the developers of R, then I shall make absolutely certain that I
avoid using R for anything where I actually care about the results, and would
strongly encourage everyone else to do the same.
This was a statement of just one (though not unimportant) person from
the R Core team. I don't think that this is the only view of R Core
developers. On the other hand he is the person, who actually did most of
the stuff within R for years now to circumvent the problems running on
FreeBSD.
In general, (sane) people use the long double versions because they need the
extra precision and care about the result. We could easily implement the long
double versions now as toy versions that just called the double versions, but
that would upset a lot of people who actually care about accuracy, who are the
main target audience for these functions.
It seems to be a general trend (outside of FreeBSD) to implement more
and more stuff at the cost of quality. I am certain that for many
FreeBSD users accuracy is more important than completeness, especially
for scientists.
Nevertheless this policy brings some problems in the real world ;-)
Thanks again for your thoughts,
Rainer
David
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
