Re:

Re:

[Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)]

Hi Walter,

On 5/19/21 11:08 PM, Radisson97@gmx.de wrote:
>  From 765db7b7714514780b4e613c6d09d2ff454b1ef8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Harms <wharms@bfs.de>
> Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 22:25:08 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gamma.3:Add reentrant functions gamma_r
> 
> Add three variants of gamma_r and explain
> the use of the second argument sig
> 
> Signed-off-by: Harms <wharms@bfs.de>

I just read the manual page about gamma, and those functions/macros are 
deprecated (use either lgamma or tgamma instead).  As far as I can read, 
those alternative functions have all the functionality one can need, so 
I guess there's zero reasons to use gamma at all, which is a misleading 
alias for lgamma.  I think I won't patch that page at all.

The glibc source code itself has a comment saying that gamma macros are 
obsolete:

[
#if defined __USE_MISC || (defined __USE_XOPEN && !defined  __USE_XOPEN2K)
# if !__MATH_DECLARING_FLOATN
/* Obsolete alias for `lgamma'.  */
__MATHCALL (gamma,, (_Mdouble_));
# endif
#endif
]

Thanks,

Alex


-- 
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Senior SW Engineer; http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/

AW: Re:

[Walter Harms]

I will not argue that the function is deprecated.

NTL i added the gamma_r function that are missing
and changed the wording for the description. I think
it is better than in lgamma especially  for signgam.
I noticed that it should be more obvious.

re,
 wh


________________________________________
Von: Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) <alx.manpages@gmail.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Mai 2021 13:04
An: Radisson97@gmx.de
Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org; Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Betreff: Re:

WARNUNG: Diese E-Mail kam von außerhalb der Organisation. Klicken Sie nicht auf Links oder öffnen Sie keine Anhänge, es sei denn, Sie kennen den/die Absender*in und wissen, dass der Inhalt sicher ist.


Hi Walter,

On 5/19/21 11:08 PM, Radisson97@gmx.de wrote:
>  From 765db7b7714514780b4e613c6d09d2ff454b1ef8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Harms <wharms@bfs.de>
> Date: Wed, 19 May 2021 22:25:08 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] gamma.3:Add reentrant functions gamma_r
>
> Add three variants of gamma_r and explain
> the use of the second argument sig
>
> Signed-off-by: Harms <wharms@bfs.de>

I just read the manual page about gamma, and those functions/macros are
deprecated (use either lgamma or tgamma instead).  As far as I can read,
those alternative functions have all the functionality one can need, so
I guess there's zero reasons to use gamma at all, which is a misleading
alias for lgamma.  I think I won't patch that page at all.

The glibc source code itself has a comment saying that gamma macros are
obsolete:

[
#if defined __USE_MISC || (defined __USE_XOPEN && !defined  __USE_XOPEN2K)
# if !__MATH_DECLARING_FLOATN
/* Obsolete alias for `lgamma'.  */
__MATHCALL (gamma,, (_Mdouble_));
# endif
#endif
]

Thanks,

Alex


--
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Senior SW Engineer; http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/

Re: AW: Re:

[Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)]

Hi Walter,

On 5/21/21 3:11 PM, Walter Harms wrote:
> I will not argue that the function is deprecated.
> 
> NTL i added the gamma_r function that are missing
> and changed the wording for the description. I think
> it is better than in lgamma especially  for signgam.
> I noticed that it should be more obvious.
> 
> re,
>   wh

I never used these functions, so I don know for sure.  Isn't gamma_r(3) 
just an (obsolete) alias for lgamma_r(3)?

If so, lgamma_r(3) is already documented, and the gamma(3) manual page 
already points to it.  I don't see why gamma_r(3), which is obsolete, 
should be documented.

Thanks,

Alex


-- 
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/

AW: AW: Re:

[Walter Harms]

(before we misunderstand each other i do not insists on that patch)

The function is available and that should be documented.
They seem available for some time, but glibc says: These functions 
exist for compatibility reasons.

What is about a merger with lgamma() ?

adding to the notes section something like that:
   glibc version
       Glibc  has  a  gamma() function (and _r) that is equivalent to 
       lgamma(3) and computes the natural logarithm of the Gamma function.
       That function is deprecated and should not be used in newer programs. 


re,
 wh

________________________________________
Von: Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) <alx.manpages@gmail.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Mai 2021 15:29
An: Walter Harms
Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org; Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Betreff: Re: AW: Re:

WARNUNG: Diese E-Mail kam von außerhalb der Organisation. Klicken Sie nicht auf Links oder öffnen Sie keine Anhänge, es sei denn, Sie kennen den/die Absender*in und wissen, dass der Inhalt sicher ist.


Hi Walter,

On 5/21/21 3:11 PM, Walter Harms wrote:
> I will not argue that the function is deprecated.
>
> NTL i added the gamma_r function that are missing
> and changed the wording for the description. I think
> it is better than in lgamma especially  for signgam.
> I noticed that it should be more obvious.
>
> re,
>   wh

I never used these functions, so I don know for sure.  Isn't gamma_r(3)
just an (obsolete) alias for lgamma_r(3)?

If so, lgamma_r(3) is already documented, and the gamma(3) manual page
already points to it.  I don't see why gamma_r(3), which is obsolete,
should be documented.

Thanks,

Alex


--
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/

Re: gamma(3)

[Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)]

On 5/21/21 4:08 PM, Walter Harms wrote:
> (before we misunderstand each other i do not insists on that patch)

No problem about it.  You could insist on if you wanted to :p

I'm not sure yet about what we should do.

> 
> The function is available and that should be documented.

I tend to agree with that.

> They seem available for some time, but glibc says: These functions
> exist for compatibility reasons.

Exactly.  But that means it exists for old code to still work.  New code 
should not use these.  So the manual page should serve 2 purposes:

*) discourage its use
*) help migrating from gamma(3) to lgamma(3)

The first one is already clear.  For the second one, I think that the 
SYNOPSIS and ATTRIBUTES is enough.

> 
> What is about a merger with lgamma() ?

I like it separated (as is).  It serves the purpose of redirecting to 
either lgamma or tgamma depending on what the reader wants.

> 
> adding to the notes section something like that:
>     glibc version
>         Glibc  has  a  gamma() function (and _r) that is equivalent to
>         lgamma(3) and computes the natural logarithm of the Gamma function.
>         That function is deprecated and should not be used in newer programs.
> 
> 
> re,
>   wh

I think that to document those, but keep it to a minimum, I'd add the 
functions to the sections NAME and SYNOPSIS, and nothing more.  The rest 
is very generic and mainly says "don't use this".  The only thing that 
would maybe need an update is the ATTRIBUTES section, but I wouldn't 
mind if we left it as is.


What do you think?

Cheers,

Alex


-- 
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/

AW: gamma(3)

[Walter Harms]

So we have agreed that existing functions should be documented.
and so far i understand we are taking about the  _r only.

the whole patch is the function definition. What could be done more is to mark the function as obsolete/compatibility only.

The explanation for signgam should  be copied to lgamma().

________________________________________
Von: Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) <alx.manpages@gmail.com>
Gesendet: Freitag, 21. Mai 2021 16:47:29
An: Walter Harms
Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org; Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Betreff: Re: gamma(3)

WARNUNG: Diese E-Mail kam von außerhalb der Organisation. Klicken Sie nicht auf Links oder öffnen Sie keine Anhänge, es sei denn, Sie kennen den/die Absender*in und wissen, dass der Inhalt sicher ist.


On 5/21/21 4:08 PM, Walter Harms wrote:
> (before we misunderstand each other i do not insists on that patch)

No problem about it.  You could insist on if you wanted to :p

I'm not sure yet about what we should do.

>
> The function is available and that should be documented.

I tend to agree with that.

> They seem available for some time, but glibc says: These functions
> exist for compatibility reasons.

Exactly.  But that means it exists for old code to still work.  New code
should not use these.  So the manual page should serve 2 purposes:

*) discourage its use
*) help migrating from gamma(3) to lgamma(3)

The first one is already clear.  For the second one, I think that the
SYNOPSIS and ATTRIBUTES is enough.

>
> What is about a merger with lgamma() ?

I like it separated (as is).  It serves the purpose of redirecting to
either lgamma or tgamma depending on what the reader wants.

>
> adding to the notes section something like that:
>     glibc version
>         Glibc  has  a  gamma() function (and _r) that is equivalent to
>         lgamma(3) and computes the natural logarithm of the Gamma function.
>         That function is deprecated and should not be used in newer programs.
>
>
> re,
>   wh

I think that to document those, but keep it to a minimum, I'd add the
functions to the sections NAME and SYNOPSIS, and nothing more.  The rest
is very generic and mainly says "don't use this".  The only thing that
would maybe need an update is the ATTRIBUTES section, but I wouldn't
mind if we left it as is.


What do you think?

Cheers,

Alex


--
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/