From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 90321 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2017 16:18:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact newlib-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: newlib-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 89817 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jun 2017 16:18:27 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*f:sk:Zcn9J3v, H*f:_rPDviO08y, H*i:sk:f8e36f0, newlibs X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:18:26 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1dQc9A-0006Qa-KI from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 09:18:24 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.87) by svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 17:18:22 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dQc93-0004Jo-SS; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:18:17 +0000 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:18:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Joel Sherrill CC: Dionna Amalie Glaze , Aditya Upadhyay , "newlib@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Long double complex methods In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) To svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) X-SW-Source: 2017/txt/msg00526.txt.bz2 On Wed, 28 Jun 2017, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Also, although I don't know how to run them, doesn't someone > run glibc tests on newlib? They likely have tests for this for > newlib's purposes. It would be interesting to see results of glibc libm tests (current git please, there have been major changes since the last release) for a range of libm implementations and operating systems, but also probably a lot of work to get them building with other C libraries; they make plenty of use of glibc features, include some internal glibc headers for configuration of some details of the architecture, and hardcode glibc choices of goals for errno, exceptions and accuracy that other libm implementations may differ on. An implementation/architecture-specific libm-test-ulps file also needs to be generated before you can expect clean results even for an implementation following glibc's goals. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com