Hi all,

(I am very new to this mail list so please cut me some slack)

trigonometric functions like sin(x) are usually implemented as:

1. Some very complicated function that does bit twiddling and basically 
computes the reminder of x by pi/2. An example in 
http://www.netlib.org/fdlibm/e_rem_pio2.c (that calls 
http://www.netlib.org/fdlibm/k_rem_pio2.c ). i.e. ~500 lines of branching C 
code. The complexity arises in part because for big values of x the subtraction 
becomes more and more ill defined, due to x being represented in binary base to 
which an irrational number has to subtracted and consecutive floating point 
values being more and more apart for higher absolute values.
2. A Taylor series for the small values of x, 
3. Plus some manipulation to get the correct branch, deal with subnormal 
numbers, deal with -0, etc...

If we used a function like sinpi(x) = sin(pi*x) part (1) can be greatly 
simplified, since it becomes trivial to separate the reminder of the division 
by pi/2. There are gains both in the accuracy and the performance.

In large parts of the code anyways there is a pi inside the argument of sin 
since it is common to compute something like sin(2*pi*f*t) etc. So I wonder if 
it is feasible to implement those functions in numpy.

To strengthen my argument I'll note that the IEEE standard, too, defines ( 
https://irem.univ-reunion.fr/IMG/pdf/ieee-754-2008.pdf ) the functions sinPi, 
cosPi, tanPi, atanPi, atan2Pi. And there are existing implementations, for 
example, in Julia ( 
https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/6aaedecc447e3d8226d5027fb13d0c3cbfbfea2a/base/special/trig.jl#L741-L745
 ) and the Boost C++ Math library ( 
https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_54_0/boost/math/special_functions/sin_pi.hpp )

And that issue caused by apparently inexact calculations have been raised in 
the past in various forums ( 
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20903384/numpy-sinpi-returns-negative-value 
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51425732/how-to-make-sinpi-and-cospi-2-zero 
https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/2g99wa/why_does_python_not_make_sinpi_0_just_really/
 ... )

PS: to be nitpicky I see that most implementation implement sinpi as sin(pi*x) 
for small values of x, i.e. they multiply x by pi and then use the same 
coefficients for the Taylor series as the canonical sin. A multiply instruction 
could be spared, in my opinion, by storing different Taylor expansion number 
coefficients tailored for the sinpi function. It is not clear to me if it is 
not done because the performance gain is small, because I am wrong about 
something, or because those 6 constants of the Taylor expansion have a "sacred 
aura" about them and nobody wants to enter deeply into this.

PPS: I am aware that it could be seen as rude to request a feature from an open 
source project but I am asking if there is a point in providing these functions 
in the first place. I could try to provide implementations for them in some 
time if it is indeed a worthwhile effort


Yours,

Tom.
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Reply via email to