*To*: 617894@bugs.debian.org*Subject*: Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough*From*: Julien PUYDT <julien.puydt@laposte.net>*Date*: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:59:48 +0100*Message-id*: <[🔎] 4D7CDBE4.3030507@laposte.net>*Reply-to*: Julien PUYDT <julien.puydt@laposte.net>, 617894@bugs.debian.org*In-reply-to*: <[🔎] 20110313144918.GA16916@hall.aurel32.net>*References*: <[🔎] 4D7B3375.2020508@laposte.net> <[🔎] 20110312111134.GB6288@hall.aurel32.net> <[🔎] 4D7B82D3.4010607@laposte.net> <[🔎] 20110313144918.GA16916@hall.aurel32.net>

Le 13/03/2011 15:49, Aurelien Jarno a écrit :

On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 03:27:31PM +0100, Julien PUYDT wrote:Isn't that a little short? If I read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_754-2008#Basic_formats well, even simple precision boasts 23 digits.23 binary digits, which means 7.22 decimal digit. For double, it lists 15.95 digit, so your example is in the expected precision range.

Snark on #sage-devel

**References**:**Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough***From:*Julien PUYDT <julien.puydt@laposte.net>

**Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough***From:*Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

**Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough***From:*Julien PUYDT <julien.puydt@laposte.net>

**Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough***From:*Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

- Prev by Date:
**Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough** - Next by Date:
**Re: [PATCH] Provide packaging rules in eglibc-source** - Previous by thread:
**Bug#617894: [ARMel] tgammal isn't accurate enough** - Next by thread:
**tzdata override disparity** - Index(es):