[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-24 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #15 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-24 14:34 --- Thanks. I'll go back to the glibc bugzilla. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43490

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-24 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #12 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-24 13:18 --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > and I have just tested a value ~2^7 and got the following Sorry I meant to say ~2^30 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43490

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-24 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #11 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-24 13:16 --- (In reply to comment #10) > Both sin and sinf are assembly routines so can't probably be affected by > the gcc used to compile them. See sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_sinf.S and > sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_sin.

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-24 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #9 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-24 12:19 --- (In reply to comment #7) > This is a glibc problem. Confirmed by LD_PRELOADing a different libm which > makes it work. > > Please report to glibc bugzilla instead. > The glibc team are sayi

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-23 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #8 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-23 13:37 --- (In reply to comment #6) > you can test two different implementations: > 1). '-O2 -m32 -fno-builtin' - force libm.so calls and test libc > implementation. > 2). '-O2 -m32' to

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-23 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #5 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-23 13:10 --- (In reply to comment #4) > > BUT sin(x) becomes progressively more inaccurate with increasing magnitude > > of > > x, as with the above version (on x86). At a guess, it would seem like >

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-23 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #3 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-23 12:20 --- (In reply to comment #2) > duplicate of PR43405. > It's doesn't seem to be the same. I just tried the test source from 43405 and on the old system (gcc 3.4.6) (which I assumed

[Bug c/43490] sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-23 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
--- Comment #1 from simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com 2010-03-23 12:06 --- Created an attachment (id=20168) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20168&action=view) Trivial test program that outputs sin(x) and sinf(x) for various vals VS expected results I haven&

[Bug c/43490] New: sin(x) (actually probably all trig) is inaccurate for large x

2010-03-23 Thread simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com
large x Product: gcc Version: 4.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: simon dot fenney at imgtec dot com GCC build triplet: ??? GC