Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:33:02 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Eric Rudd <rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Math functions
In-Reply-To: <3920083E.AC36E000@cyberoptics.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000516143219.24814F-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Mon, 15 May 2000, Eric Rudd wrote:

> Nor can I.  The decisive argument for me was my inability to
> conceive of any test of "double" trig functions that used only
> "double" arithmetic, yet managed to reveal such range-reduction
> errors.

Perhaps some multiple-precision package could help.  Using it, you
could create test cases, like djtst does in the Cygnus test suite part
by using Steven Mishier's quad-precision functions, and then run the
long double functions on those test cases.  MP code is slow, but since
you only generate the test cases once, this should not be a problem.