[v3] Fix libstdc++/50880 in a better way

2011-11-02 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, tested x86_64-linux, committed to mainline. Paolo. // 2011-11-02 Richard B. Kreckel Paolo Carlini PR libstdc++/50880 * include/std/complex (__complex_acosh): Fix in a better way, use Kahan's formula. * include/tr1/complex (__

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > >> I am surprised by your comment.  You do not care and that is why you >> are eager to >> commit the patch without checking first with fellow area maintainers? > > Yes, probably my comment wan't clear enough: my point was that I canno

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, > I am surprised by your comment. You do not care and that is why you > are eager to > commit the patch without checking first with fellow area maintainers? Yes, probably my comment wan't clear enough: my point was that I cannot spend more time on this issue. I'm convinced, I may be wrong,

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi again, >> >> Hmm, why is the test of the form x < 0.0, and not testing the sign of x? > > Actually, we can as well use the std::abs, no? > > Paolo The point of using sign is so that signed zero is not mischaracterized, especially when cu

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Paolo Carlini >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> tested x86_64-linux (with _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_COMPLEX_TR1 manually set to zero >>> for the affected function), committed to mainline. Will go in 4.6.3 too. >> >>

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi again, > > Hmm, why is the test of the form x < 0.0, and not testing the sign of x? Actually, we can as well use the std::abs, no? Paolo

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Paolo Carlini > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> tested x86_64-linux (with _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_COMPLEX_TR1 manually set to zero >> for the affected function), committed to mainline. Will go in 4.6.3 too. > > Hmm, why is the test of the form x < 0.0, and not testing the s

Re: [v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Gabriel Dos Reis
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:02 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Hi, > > tested x86_64-linux (with _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_COMPLEX_TR1 manually set to zero > for the affected function), committed to mainline. Will go in 4.6.3 too. Hmm, why is the test of the form x < 0.0, and not testing the sign of x?

[v3] Fix libstdc++/50880

2011-10-27 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, tested x86_64-linux (with _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_COMPLEX_TR1 manually set to zero for the affected function), committed to mainline. Will go in 4.6.3 too. Thanks, Paolo. /// 2011-10-27 Richard B. Kreckel Paolo Carlini PR libstdc++/50880 * i