This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCHv4] ldbl-128: Use L(x) macro for long double constants
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "Paul E. Murphy" <murphyp at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 22:56:33 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] ldbl-128: Use L(x) macro for long double constants
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <997588c1-5bcf-6339-4c7f-1339d91e45cf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016, Paul E. Murphy wrote:
> @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ __ieee754_atan2l(_Float128 y, _Float128 x)
> if(((ix|((lx|-lx)>>63))>0x7fff000000000000LL)||
> ((iy|((ly|-ly)>>63))>0x7fff000000000000LL)) /* x or y is NaN */
> return x+y;
> - if(((hx-0x3fff000000000000LL)|lx)==0) return __atanl(y); /* x=1.0L */
> + if(((hx-0x3fff000000000000LL)|lx)==0) return __atanl(y); /* x=1 */
Is this change of a comment deliberate? I thought you were avoiding
changing comments.
> + L(0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000E0),
Is it deliberate that this (in e_logl.c) is not becoming integer 0 (it may
well make sense to avoid converting to integers in such generated tables,
but you didn't call it out in the patch description as a deliberate
fixup)? Likewise in s_atanl.c.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com