public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/32180] Paranoia UCB GSL TestFloat libm tests fail - accuracy of recent gcc math poor
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 22:43:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070615224321.6689.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-32180-13830@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
------- Comment #22 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2007-06-15 22:43 -------
Subject: Re: Paranoia UCB GSL TestFloat libm tests fail
- accuracy of recent gcc math poor
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, rob1weld at aol dot com wrote:
> This is just one number. How many more could there be, how will you prove you
> are correct and deduce the actual correct answer in those instances. This is
> what you must answer. This is why we need a fast, simple, library that is
> accurate and comes with "proof".
You are ascribing too much significance to the proofs. The proofs are
proofs of bounds on the accumulation of error during the calculation
(round-off errors and errors arising from the approximation to the
function being used in the algorithm), not of the actual implementations
being correct. To go from there to the functions being correct, the
proofs rely on:
* The tables of values / polynomial coefficients / ... used in the
approximations must have been computed correctly. This relies on another
implementation (such as Maple) being correct.
* The exhaustive searches for worst cases for approximation must also have
used another correct implementation of the functions at higher precision.
* Where the exhaustive searches haven't been able to cover the whole
domain of the function, there must be no particularly bad problem cases
outside the area covered.
* The C code for the functions must accurately correspond to the algorithm
whose error bounds are proved. Proving things directly about C code is
hard in practice.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32180
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-15 22:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-01 15:56 [Bug c/32180] New: " rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-01 16:16 ` [Bug target/32180] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-03 13:16 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-03 15:15 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-03 16:05 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-03 16:35 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-03 21:12 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-04 8:58 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-04 9:07 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-04 9:16 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-04 17:32 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-05 17:22 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-07 13:42 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-07 13:49 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-08 0:23 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-12 17:50 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-13 7:53 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-13 11:30 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2007-06-13 17:53 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-14 8:14 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-15 21:23 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-15 22:23 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-15 22:43 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com [this message]
2007-06-16 18:12 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2007-06-17 20:52 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
2010-02-20 23:43 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-12 1:54 ` rob1weld at aol dot com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070615224321.6689.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).