Paolo Carlini wrote:
We are already aware of this issue, since you have already reported
it ;) The relevant PR is middle-end/18902.
Forgot to add: for other issues, related in particular to multiplication,
not only division, please file appropriate Bugzilla PRs.
Thanks!
Paolo.
I have looked at the implementation of complex arithmetic in gcc.
We are already aware of this issue, since you have already reported
it ;) The relevant PR is middle-end/18902.
Indeed, our plan involves enabling the (*already available*) algorithm
due to Smith. There are still some open issues, how
Hello
> >
> Ok, thanks. The important section of the C99 standard is Annex G (IEC
> 60559-compatible complex arithmetic): it even provides a reference
> implementation of the division in Example2. Perhaps, you could have a
> look to a public draft of the final standard, just Google a bit... ;)
> Bu
Andreas Klein wrote:
Unfortunally I have own no copy of the C99 standard. So I would be glade
if you could give me an internet ressource which disscuss the C99 division
algorithm or something like that. Then I will try to check what we can do.
Ok, thanks. The important section of the C99 standar
Hello
>
> | What was the critice you mentioned above? I can not imagine a sitation in
> | which I would need the naive implementation.
>
> Oh, I got repeated complaints from users that the correct method of
> computation was slow -- look at the bugzilla archive. I believe there
> might alos be di
Hello
> >
> Have a look to the implementation: it looks like that even if we switch
> to the
> better algorithm, still we don't get fully right C99. Of course this
> last point
> must be better investigate (I'm not a floating point expert) but I
> expect someone
> replying: "let's implement C99 div
Andreas Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| This look like a good deal. However for floting point computations I
| prevere good results over fast results.
You're in the minority (including me :-)).
-- Gaby
Andreas Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
|
| >
| > As a matter of fact, the implementation of is criticized,
| > once in a while, because it does NOT use the grammar school rule you
| > present above. However, for float, double, long double it spec
Andreas Klein wrote:
... but notice that this issue is tricky: there are computational issues
(we are adding
at least a branch for each division) and correctness issues (what about
C99?)
As I see it the naive formula needs
6 multipications, 2 divisions and 3 additions/subtractions
and the impr
Hello
> >However I think if flag_complex_divide_method = 1 fix the problem it would
> >be a good idea to set it by default.
> >
> >
> ... but notice that this issue is tricky: there are computational issues
> (we are adding
> at least a branch for each division) and correctness issues (what about
Paolo Carlini wrote:
I will try to do the same as soon as possible...
I can confirm that setting flag_complex_divide_method = 1 leads to (0, 0).
Paolo.
Andreas Klein wrote:
Have a look to expand_complex_division in gcc/tree-complex.c, then
gcc/toplev.c for flag_complex_divide_method.
Andreas, just for curiosity, are you willing to rebuild your gcc
with flag_complex_divide_method = 1 and report???
Willing is not the problem. But I have only li
Hello
> Interestingly, it looks like the discussed improved algorithm is
> *already* implemented, just not used!
Curious
> Have a look to expand_complex_division in gcc/tree-complex.c, then
> gcc/toplev.c for flag_complex_divide_method.
>
> Andreas, just for curiosity, are you willing to rebuild
As you mentinon it if have missed the specilization at the end of
std_complex.h. Sorry. I still think that we should have and other
implementation for complex, but I cannot change the code
of __complex__ T in the complier.
Interestingly, it looks like the discussed improved algorithm is
*already* i
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
> As a matter of fact, the implementation of is criticized,
> once in a while, because it does NOT use the grammar school rule you
> present above. However, for float, double, long double it specializes
> to __complex__ T which is what the compile
Andreas Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hello
|
| I have found a bug in the implementation of the complex library of
| g++ and the complex.h library of the gcc (c99 support).
|
| The simplest program that demonstrates the bug is:
|
|
|
| #include
| #include
16 matches
Mail list logo
