Subject: Re: [boost] Review request: extended complex number library
From: jtl (jtlapreste_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-08 18:50:17
Le 08/03/2012 19:40, Vicente J. Botet Escriba a écrit :
> Le 07/03/12 23:36, Mathias Gaunard a écrit :
>> On 03/07/2012 11:20 PM, Christopher Jefferson wrote:
>>> On 7 Mar 2012, at 22:12, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
>>>> On 03/06/2012 07:49 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
>>>>> you are right. The goal been to provide a faster library implies that
>>>>> the Boost library should use the standard library when the
>>>>> standard is
>>>>> more efficient, and we could expect that the standard is faster
>>>>> for the
>>>>> scope it covers.
>>>> What about correctness?
>>>> Most implementations of standard library functions on complex
>>>> numbers are not correct from a numerical point of view.
>>> Really? Can you give some examples? Have you reported these issues
>>> to the various compiler designers?
>> Verbatim from the libstdc++ headers
>> // 26.2.5/13
>> // XXX: This is a grammar school implementation.
>> template<typename _Tp>
>> template<typename _Up>
>> complex<_Tp>::operator*=(const complex<_Up>& __z)
>> const _Tp __r = _M_real * __z.real() - _M_imag * __z.imag();
>> _M_imag = _M_real * __z.imag() + _M_imag * __z.real();
>> _M_real = __r;
>> return *this;
>> This is incorrect for infinite types and causes undue overflow or
> IIUC the standard cover just complex on builtin types, isn't it? See
> the C99 or C11 standards, annex G.
>> It also comes with a possible implementation.
> I don't which can be the correct implementation for C++ complex on
> builtin types without using arbitrary precision.
> I have no access to this standard. Please could you add it here?
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
look for instance n1124.pdf which is a C99 draft.
The aim is not to have full precision but to minimize
overflows/underflows and to
get good behviour with inf and nan.
1) (0+0i)*(inf+0i) must return nan+0i, not nan+nani
2) if modulus(a)² overflow this must not necesseraly implies
that 1/a which is mathematically conj(a)/modulus(a)² underflows
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk