X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.6 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: References: <20110409160524 DOT GA29135 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>

<85C4645B18FA4D37852D725436AB741B AT desktop2> Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 19:30:25 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: newlib and long-double question From: "N. C." To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Exactly, I really need to be able to build Perl whose NV is a long double. And this was just one example that I gave. I honestly think it is worth it to have long double support in cygwin (to have those functions that are currently undefined), as it seems more and more clear that A) there is a use for them, and B) there are cases where it really is needed. IIRC, the whole point of cygwin is to have a unix-like environment within a non-unix-like system, right? Does it not make sense to make the back bone (libc) that much mroe complete, furthur augmenting usability and compatibility? Again, thanks to all of you for your time and input. - N.C. On 4/10/11, Hugh Myers wrote: > 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 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 >>> it. >>> >> >> I sense an opportunity here to plug (to the op) the Math::MPFR perl module >> - >> 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 >> its >> use has always discouraged me. >> Perhaps he has also already considered and rejected Math::MPFR, but it >> seems >> 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: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple