Re: calling sincosf on subnormal argument is wrong

[Dmitrieva Liubov <liubov dot dmitrieva at gmail dot com>]

Ok, we will fix bugs with sincos using on our side.


--
Liubov Dmitrieva
Intel Corporation

2012/8/16 Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, Dmitrieva Liubov wrote:
>
>> > Since the
>> > bugs arising from calling sincos are currently latent, no need to file
>> > them in Bugzilla before sending a patch
>>
>> Ok, I will file them after a patch with optimized sincos.
>
> What I meant was: you can send patches to *fix* the uses of sincos without
> needing to file associated bugs; a patch known to expose latent bugs as
> testsuite failures is unlikely to be approved.  And then propose optimized
> sincos once the latent bugs (that optimized sincos would expose) are
> fixed.  I don't think these latent bugs should be that hard to fix, and as
> you've found there are already relevant testcases in the testsuite for
> them.
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com