search for: transcendentals

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:49:24AM -0700, Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev wrote: > An optional MPFR dependency would also be pretty painful. I expect it will > frequently be missing and will not be exercised by most buildbots. IMO if constant folding of transcendental functions makes a significant difference for your program, you likely are doing something strange already. I don't think it

Thanks Jean-Marc, >What you want is simply to override some of the functions in misc.c. I >made it easy to do by wrapping malloc() a speex_alloc() call. Aside from >what's in misc.c, the only other thing I use are some of the math >functions like cos(). That makes sense. But how does the DLL version, which is not linked to the C runtime, get access to C's transcendental

Hi, In the course of some work which I describe below, I have found a very significant difference between the BARK function described in the Vorbis specification and its implementation in libvorbis. In the specificationhttp://xiph.org/vorbis/doc/Vorbis_I_spec.pdf bark(x) = 13.1arctan(.00074x) + 2.24arctan(.0000000185x**2 + .0001x) In the libvorbis code

> It might be clearer, instead of using 'libm', to use something like 'trans' (for transcendental functions). That does seem clearer. ‘trans’ is definitely good with me. -Warren From: Hal Finkel [mailto:hfinkel at anl.gov] Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 5:13 PM To: Ristow, Warren; Bruce Hoult Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Trouble when suppressing a

Hi Joerg, > IMO if constant folding of transcendental functions makes a significant difference for your program, you likely are doing something strange already. Alas it's not as simple as that. Currently, if you declare: std::uniform_real_distribution<float> x; LLVM emits two calls to logl() with constant arguments, a fdiv and a fptoui. Libc++'s implementation is consumed and

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Rafael Avila de Espindola < rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > If we require the host to have sse2 or other IEEE 754 conformant > implementation, would it be possible to use hardware float? > I don't think that IEEE 754 actually guarantees bit-exact results in all cases. -- Sean Silva > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On

Hi, If you're interested, include/bits/random.tcc:3312 (std::generate_canonical()). I wish I could just point people at libc++, but that's outside of my control. As for fixing the library, that horse bolted some time ago. Cheers, James On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 at 18:50 Stephen Canon <scanon at apple.com> wrote: > That sounds like a library issue that qualifies as “somewhat

>>> I'd like to emphasise in the latter one: "This option also relaxes the precision of >>> commonly used math functions." >> >> Isn't this the "libm" flag that is proposed in this thread? > > I don't know. I didn't see any definition of it. > > In my case I'm talking about allowing the use of lower precision but

Hi, Clang is currently unable to constant fold calls to math.h functions such as logl(), expl() etc. The problem is that APFloat doesn't have these functions, so Clang is forced to rely on the host math library. Because long double isn't portable, we only ever query the host math library for double or float results. I can see three methods for allowing constant folding for types that

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dmitry Mikushin" <dmitry at kernelgen.org> > To: "Justin Holewinski" <justin.holewinski at gmail.com> > Cc: "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov>, "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 10:19:42 AM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] SIMD

First let me say that I really like the notion of being able to plug in .bc libraries into the compiler and I think that there are many potential uses (i.e. vector saturation operations and the like). But even so it is important to realize the limitations of this approach. Generally implementations of transcendental functions require platform specific optimizations to get the best performance and

Jim Grosbach wrote: > That does raise a clarifying question here. Is the code you’re interested in > using Intel or AT&T syntax? > > Also note that the question isn’t whether we should support the btr/bts > instructions. We absolutely must (and do). The question is whether we are > properly handling the un-suffixed mnemonic form of the assembly syntax. > > Perhaps you

Does anyone know the data memory requirements for fixed point AEC? -Deepa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20061024/b9d776d6/attachment.htm

I''m having problems with using Rails for a financial application: the database stores financial fields as decimal, but ActiveRecord converts these to float - so I get the rounding errors you''d expect (http://www.mindprod.com/jgloss/floatingpoint.html). This has come up recently, and the recommended fix seems to be to be Tobi Luetke''s ''money'' gem

>> I'm a bit confused about this discussion, but since I don't have f2c on ... >A lot of Fortran code doesn't require any libf2c routines. When routines >are needed the most common ones are the exponentiation routines pow_dd, >pow_ii and pow_di (pow_ri is for single precision reals and so is less >needed in R, which uses double precision). However, *some* fortran

Hi all. In fact, this is how we have implemented it in our compiler (intel's OpenCL). We have created a .bc file for every architecture. Each file contains all the SIMD versions for the functions to be vectorized. To cope with the massive amount of code to be produced, we implemented a dedicated tblgen BE for that purpose. We are willing to share that code with the llvm community, in case this

Hi, How could i generate random real numbers between 0 en 2*pi? Thanks, Frederik [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Elior Malul" <elior.malul at intel.com> > To: "Michael Gottesman" <mgottesman at apple.com>, "Hal Finkel" <hfinkel at anl.gov> > Cc: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 8:33:42 AM > Subject: RE: [LLVMdev] SIMD

hi, i have searched through the archives but did not manage to find benchmarks of encoding/decoding speex on ARM processor. esp interested in ARM9E. understand that ARM5E has some dsp-like instructions, wonder whether they are compatible with those in ARM9E. thanks in advance. tk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I have a very simple test case on Windows that shows some surprising behavior. This doesn't seem to be a problem on Linux. The example is: #include <stdio.h> #include <math.h> double heat(double Pr) { return pow(Pr, 0.33); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { double Nu = heat(291.00606180486119); printf("%.20f\n", Nu); } I've tested with MinGW's gcc.exe