Dan Piponi writes:
jerzy.karczmarczuk wrote:
So, you assume that acos should have a *default* implementation in the Floating class? Propose it, please.
I don't think the proposal makes any such assumption. It implies only that *if* you provide acos, pi will be provided for you automatically if you want.
Yes, sorry, I slipped... I was so against the acos(-1) /or atan(...)/ solution, that I wrote anything...
Note, BTW that from the viewpoint of "actual" correctness, it would be better to have PI as exact as possible, while acos, well, it is a trans- cendental function, whose representations are usually approximate...
pi is a transcendental number, same argument applies.
No. There is a difference between one constant which can be represented with the maximum precision possible, and a procedure which necessarily uses some approximations, and whose local precision for some argument will be typically much lower than the machine one. Jerzy Karczmarczuk