https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871
--- Comment #39 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> --- On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 12:07:18PM +0000, thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93871 > > On the other hand side, always folding sind(45...90) to cosd(45...0) and > cosd(45...90) to sind(45...0) probably wouldn't be such a bad thing. > It is not only a good thing, it is required to get small max ULP near zero crossings. Testing fma is as accurate and as fast as the bit twiddling methods I devised. I haven't verified, but it seems gcc inlines fma, which likely is bit twiddling.
