On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:10 AM, David Cournapeau <courn...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Charles R Harris > <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > > Yeah, but there isn't much low level stuff there and I don't want to toss > a > > lot of real numerical code into it. > > I don't understand: there is already math code there, and you cannot > be much more low level than what's there (there is already quite a bit > of bit twiddling for long double). I split the code into complex and > real, IEEE 754 macros/funcs in another file. I don' think we need to > split into one file / function, at least not with the current size of > the library. > > Yeah, but the added code in four versions with documentation for log1p alone will add substantially to the current size. What I am saying is that the current code is small because it uses current functions or falls back to double versions. It doesn't really implement the low level stuff. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
