Why are you trying to roll your own sin(x) function? I think you will be hard pressed to improve on the library sin(x) in either speed or accuracy.
John On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 3:38:17 AM UTC-4, Jeffrey Sarnoff wrote: > > I had tried to find a clean way to jump into the taylor series using the > well approximated sin(x) or cos(x) and so additionally limit the terms used > -- there may be / probably is a way in concert with an additional > tabulation (which would be fine in this case). Taylor's theorem is not > numerically crisp, so while I can identify the next term (using, perhaps > eps(sin(x))/3) I don't know how to back out the delta between accumulation > of the series to the prior term and the value sin(x::Float64). > > On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 3:29:28 AM UTC-4, Jeffrey Sarnoff wrote: >> >> That has promise, Kristoffer. I did port something of that nature, >> expecting it to work well -- but there was some numerical mush in more than >> a couple of trailing bits in some cases. >> Using more terms did not help. Thinking about it just now, it might be >> more robustly stable if I expand in one direction only upfrom or downfrom >> some pretabulated points. >> >> On Saturday, October 17, 2015 at 2:47:57 AM UTC-4, Kristoffer Carlsson >> wrote: >>> >>> Use a truncated Taylor series around the point maybe? >> >>
