On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:10 AM, David Cournapeau <cournape@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Charles R Harris
<charlesr.harris@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, but there isn't much low level stuff there and I don't want to toss a
> lot of real numerical code into it.

I don't understand: there is already math code there, and you cannot
be much more low level than what's there (there is already quite a bit
of bit twiddling for long double). I split the code into complex and
real, IEEE 754 macros/funcs in another file. I don' think we need to
split into one file / function, at least not with the current size of
the library.

Yeah, but the added code in four versions with documentation for log1p alone will add substantially to the current size. What I am saying is that the current code is small because it uses current functions or falls back to double versions. It doesn't really implement the low level stuff.