On 17/11/17 15:05 -0500, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote:
This is an embarrassment actually, after the excellent analysis in the
PR trail.
We've (I've) been using the wrong sign convention for the nu parameter
in comp_ellint_3 and in ellint_3 in tr1 and now std for years. In my
defence the World seems about evenly split on this with GSL,
Abramowitz&Stegun (and DLMF) and Carlson (that's what actually got me
here) on the +nu side, and tr1/std, boost on the other -nu side.
We need to get this into 8.
I'm not sure about backporting to 7. I don't think we should change
this breaking in the middle of a release series.
Hmm, you're probably right. I'd be tempted to though.
I'll write a Mea Culpa warning about changing ellint_3, comp_ellint_3
in the release notes and in the libstdc++ pages and the tr29124
conformance page later.
This builds and passes on x86-64-linux.
OK for 8?
OK, thanks.
