We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Lurking in my inbox:
I sent a long long time ago (for boost 1.72) a proposal of correction of a very small bug of the cos_pi and sin_pi implementations and I have just see that in the last 1.78 beta 1 nothing has been corrected yet. The bug is from a conversion, line 36 for cos_pi.hpp and line 41 for sin_pi.hpp: if(iconvert(rem, pol) & 1) invert = !invert; if rem is not representable in the integral type issued by iconvert, the result can be incorrect. I proposed a a one liner correction, replacing the wrong test by if(floor(rem/2)*2 != rem) invert = !invert; which does not make use of integer conversion. Of course any other way to correctly compute the parity of rem will do the job. Looking forward for your answer and correction perhaps for boost 1.79 ? Thanks for the great boost::math, and apologies for this direct mailing. Jean-Thierry Lapresté
I sent a long long time ago (for boost 1.72) a proposal of correction of a very small bug of the cos_pi and sin_pi implementations
and I have just see that in the last 1.78 beta 1 nothing has been corrected yet.
The bug is from a conversion, line 36 for cos_pi.hpp and line 41 for sin_pi.hpp:
if(iconvert(rem, pol) & 1) invert = !invert;
if rem is not representable in the integral type issued by iconvert, the result can be incorrect.
I proposed a a one liner correction, replacing the wrong test by
if(floor(rem/2)*2 != rem) invert = !invert;
which does not make use of integer conversion.
Of course any other way to correctly compute the parity of rem will do the job.
Looking forward for your answer and correction perhaps for boost 1.79 ?
Thanks for the great boost::math, and apologies for this direct mailing.
Jean-Thierry Lapresté
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Fix for issue boostorg#737
019de0d
Merge pull request #738 from mborland/issue737
3019900
Fix for issue #737
Fixed in referenced PR
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Lurking in my inbox:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: