From 5a0b6b66298a9c31e2c7a950d4346a9d8401f991 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: nsz <nsz@port70.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:54:49 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] libm: update issues, use musl branch instead of libm repo

---
 libm/index.html | 24 +++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/libm/index.html b/libm/index.html
index e2dac78..e65d7f1 100644
--- a/libm/index.html
+++ b/libm/index.html
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 so already existing code is used.
 
 <ul>
-<li><a href="#prototype">Prototype</a>
+<li><a href="#branch">Branch</a>
 <li><a href="#sources">Sources</a>
 <li><a href="#issues">Design issues</a>
 <li><a href="#representation">Representation</a>
@@ -16,20 +16,21 @@ so already existing code is used.
 <li><a href="#tests">libm tests</a>
 </ul>
 
-<h3><a name="prototype" href="#prototype">Prototype</a></h3>
+<h3><a name="branch" href="#branch">Branch</a></h3>
+<p>musl branch for math hacks:
 <ul>
-<li><a href="/git/?p=libm">browse</a> with gitweb
+<li><a href="/git/?p=musl">browse</a> with gitweb
 <li>over git (recommended)
 <pre>
-git clone git://nsz.repo.hu:45100/repo/libm
+git clone git://nsz.repo.hu:45100/repo/musl
 </pre>
 <li>over http (slower)
 <pre>
-git clone http://nsz.repo.hu/repo/libm
+git clone http://nsz.repo.hu/repo/musl
 </pre>
 <li>over ssh (passwd is anon)
 <pre>
-git clone ssh://anon@nsz.repo.hu:45022/repo/libm
+git clone ssh://anon@nsz.repo.hu:45022/repo/musl
 </pre>
 </ul>
 
@@ -50,16 +51,6 @@ cvs -d <a href="http://openbsd.org/anoncvs.html#CVSROOT">$CVSROOT</a> get src/li
 
 <h3><a name="issues" href="#issues">Design issues</a></h3>
 
-<ul>
-<li>Code organization
-<p>The long double code uses ifdefs and macro hacks to allow
-ld64, ld80 and ld128 implementation in the same file.
-<p>Pending questions:
-<ul>
-<li>support c99 tgmath.h?
-<li>TODO: complex
-</ul>
-
 <li>Workarounds
 <p>The bsd libm code has many workarounds for various
 compiler issues. It's not clear what's the best way
@@ -81,7 +72,6 @@ which might worth addressing.
 <p>Pending questions:
 <ul>
 <li>Can we use a polyeval(coeffs, x) function instead of writing out the poly?
-<li>TODO: make headers c89 compatible
 <li>TODO: prefer 0x1p0 format over decimal one
 <li>TODO: use 1.0f instead of (float)1 and const float one = 1;
 <li>TODO: use uint32_t instead of int32_t (to avoid signed int overflow and right shifts)
-- 
2.20.1