Re: newlib and long-double question

[Tim Prince <n8tm@aol.com>]

On 4/10/2011 4:28 AM, Sisyphus wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hugh Myers"
>
>> The OP is trying to build Perl itself, not use it; hence the need for
>> long double support functions...
>
> You don't need "long double support functions" to build perl ... unless
> you want to build a perl whose NV is a long double (instead of a double).
>
> Presumably the op wants to build a perl whose NV is a long double so
> that he can make use of that extra precision. Given that he can't build
> such a perl, the next best way of accessing that extra precision he
> wants is, imo, to use Math::MPFR.
>
I never did see a clear description of OP's goals.  "Performance" was 
among them, so it was unclear why typical mathlinline.h content would 
have been rejected e.g.

__inline_mathcode_ (long double, __sqrtl, __x, return __builtin_sqrtl (__x))


As OP indicated, the functions might not have been difficult to write, 
perhaps not as difficult as settling requirements. If the requirement 
was for sqrtl to perform faster than sqrt, the expectation was misguided.


-- 
Tim Prince

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple