Expose additional math functions in dace/math.h#2418
Open
romanc wants to merge 6 commits into
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
dace/math.hre-exposes a couple of math functions fromcmath, e.g.std::sin(x), which has overloads for e.g.floatanddouble. Some functions, e.g.asin(x), were not exposed in this way. This leads to precision issues whenasin(x)is called with afloatbecause in the generated code,asinwill be mapped to the C version, which is only defined for doubles. There is thus an implicit cast happening of the argument and the computation is done in double precision. Worse, the return type is always adouble, which will force the rest of the calculation to be up-casted to double precision ifasin()is used in an expression.This is a re-hash (including the missing test) of #2364, which grew way too big and is now plucked apart into smaller, more meaningful PRs.
@alexnick83 would you mind giving this another look? I've added a simple test for
asin()as you asked in #2364 (review).