Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 8:49 PM Tom Lane <[email protected]> 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
