the build on i386. Leave them in the source tree for regression tests.
The asm functions were always much less accurate (by a factor of more
than 10**18 in the worst case). They were faster on old CPUs. But
with each new generation of CPUs they get relatively slower. The
double precision C version's average advantage is about a factor of 2
on Haswell.
The asm functions were already intentionally avoided in float and long
double precision on i386 and in all precisions on amd64. Float
precision and amd64 give larger advantages to the C version. The long
double precision C code and compilers' understanding of long double
precision are not so good, so the i387 is still slightly faster for
long double precision, except for the unimportant subcase of huge args
where the sub-optimal C code now somehow beats the i387 by about a
factor of 2.
versions of fmodf() amd fmodl() on i387.
fmod is similar to remainder, and the C versions are 3 to 9 times
slower than the asm versions on x86 for both, but we had the strange
mixture of all 6 variants of remainder in asm and only 1 of 6
variants of fmod in asm.
functions are only for compatibility with obsolete standards. They
shouldn't be used, so they shouldn't be optimized. Use the generic
versions instead.
This fixes scalbf() as a side effect. The optimized asm version left
garbage on the FP stack. I fixed the corresponding bug in the optimized
asm scalb() and scalbn() in 1996. NetBSD fixed it in scalb(), scalbn()
and scalbnf() in 1999 but missed fixing it in scalbf(). Then in 2005
the bug was reimplemented in FreeBSD by importing NetBSD's scalbf().
The generic versions have slightly different error handling:
- the asm versions blindly round the second parameter to a (floating
point) integer and proceed, while the generic versions return NaN
if this rounding changes the value. POSIX permits both behaviours
(these functions are XSI extensions and the behaviour for a bogus
non-integral second parameter is unspecified). Apart from this
and the bug in scalbf(), the behaviour of the generic versions seems
to be identical. (I only exhusatively tested
generic_scalbf(1.0F, anyfloat) == asm_scalb(1.0F, anyfloat). This
covers many representative corner cases involving NaNs and Infs but
doesn't test exception flags. The brokenness of scalbf() showed up
as weird behaviour after testing just 7 integer cases sequentially.)
