Questions on new libm tests

[Andreas Jaeger]

"H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:

> I'd like to contribute some new libm tests. I am enclosing the new
> double test result here. I have 3 questions:
>
> 1. The current way ulp computation doesn't support denormalized
> numbers. Should we skip those tests?

We need to handle this somehow - this is an extension of the
framework.

> 2. I don't have patches for all those failures. Should I hold off those
> tests?

Let's only add stuff if we have it fixed.

> 3. What is maximum ulp allowed in libm-test-ulps?

I don't remember such a limited - but it should be low.  It can be set
for each function,

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj/
  SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 188 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20060412/d22960b0/attachment.sig>