Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h4GH1-0007cn-8M for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 02:39:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h4GH0-0005GP-0r for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 02:39:10 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h4GGz-0005GI-MW for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 02:39:09 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1h4GGx-0001yj-6f for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2019 02:39:08 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x2E2d31c001016; Wed, 13 Mar 2019 22:39:03 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Robert Haas cc: Dean Rasheed , Michael Paquier , PostgreSQL Hackers , =?UTF-8?Q?L=C3=A6titia_Avrot?= Subject: Re: pgsql: Add support for hyperbolic functions, as well as log10(). In-reply-to: References: <20190313022159.GR13812@paquier.xyz> <24813.1552447002@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190313050331.GT13812@paquier.xyz> <17820.1552514192@sss.pgh.pa.us> <27340.1552524529@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas message dated "Wed, 13 Mar 2019 22:22:44 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1014.1552531143.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 22:39:03 -0400 Message-ID: <1015.1552531143@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 8:49 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> Meh. As I said before, we're not in the business of improving on what >> libm does --- if someone has a beef with the results, they need to take >> it to their platform's libm maintainer, not us. The point of testing >> this at all is just to ensure that we've wired up the SQL functions >> to the library functions correctly. > Pretty sure we don't even need a test for that. asinh() isn't going > to call creat() by mistake. No, but that's not the hazard. I have a very fresh-in-mind example: at one point while tweaking Laetitia's patch, I'd accidentally changed datanh so that it called tanh not atanh. The previous set of tests did not reveal that :-( regards, tom lane