X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<85C4645B18FA4D37852D725436AB741B@desktop2>
References:	<BANLkTi=ud0PMGwwzRRh+hvDVcv4=nACEYA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20110409160524 DOT GA29135 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <BANLkTikd0e3xrD_NS+HFbaSmwFd-YzkBLw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <BANLkTi=LAnmGNaF-MXS5ZUp23TFq9rCDoA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <BANLkTi=hGQXjiEa3s2HZW+yYfC9YSaXXaQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <85C4645B18FA4D37852D725436AB741B AT desktop2>
From:	Hugh Myers <hsmyers AT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Sun, 10 Apr 2011 04:47:37 -0600
Message-ID:	<BANLkTi=XbmP=4PaC6e6_Lbe37r5C9hz5-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: newlib and long-double question
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	Sisyphus <sisyphus1 AT optusnet DOT com DOT au>,
	marco atzeri <marco DOT atzeri AT gmail DOT com>, "N. C." <necrocowmoo AT gmail DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

The OP is trying to build Perl itself, not use it; hence the need for
long double support functions...

--hsm

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Sisyphus <sisyphus1 AT optusnet DOT com DOT au> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "marco atzeri"
>
>>> On a Linux system that I have access to, I see that those functions
>>> are in /lib/libm.* but cygwin's /lib/libm.* still seems to lack them.
>>> Is there any work around or alternate version ofthis lib that actually
>>> has these functions. I honestly do not mean to be rude, but how
>>> difficult is it to impliment these functions which seem so common in
>>> most unix-like systems?
>>
>> It is not overcomplicated to implement it, but it takes time and
>> someone to do it.
>> When I implemented all the complex functions (cabs, ccos..) I spent one
>> month
>> to make it right. A more capable guy will take less surely, but as
>> mention I see little
>> benefit moving from 64 to 80 bits so I was not interested to implement i=
t.
>>
>
> I sense an opportunity here to plug (to the op) the Math::MPFR perl modul=
e -
> for which the gmp and mpfr C libraries are required.
> I guess one could also use Math::BigFloat, but I assume the op has already
> considered (and rejected) that option - the performance hit incurred by i=
ts
> use has always discouraged me.
> Perhaps he has also already considered and rejected Math::MPFR, but it se=
ems
> to me to be by far the best option for achieving added precision with
> floating point numbers - at least until such time as building perl with
> -Duselongdouble has been facilitated.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
>
>
> --
> Problem reports: =A0 =A0 =A0 http://cygwin.com/problems.html
> FAQ: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 http://cygwin.com/faq/
> Documentation: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> Unsubscribe info: =A0 =A0 =A0http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
>
>

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -