Patches for s_expl.c

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith]

On 05/28/2013 05:53 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:

> Given that I've merged, unmerged, remerged, disremerged, and
> undisremerged numerous diffs over the last 2+ years, I am not
> surprise that there are issues with the patches.  I'm neither
> an expert in floating arithmetic nor style(9).  If I understand
> half of what you write when you annotate one of your diffs, I 
> feel lucky.
> 
> (Un)fortunately, I only have a few hours this week to work on
> expl/expm1l, and then I'll disappear again for a month or two
> (due to work and life).  (Un)fortunately, theraven (under the
> pretense of core) has threaten to completely rendered libm into
> a crippled useless mess by mapping all unimplemented long double
> functions to their double cousins.  When/if it comes to pass
> that I have to untangle whatever theraven does, I'll likely
> just walk away from libm hacking.

I think it is better to commit "as is" if you cannot make all the changes.

As for me, I don't really understand the need to be so consistent with
style, nor to get every last drop of optimization.  In particular,
regarding style, I think it is like people talking different languages.
 You could insist that everyone speak a common language, but it is far
better for the intellectual commons if people learn other peoples'
languages.

Anyway, I think it is better for Steve to commit, and then for Bruce to
make changes later on.