Nathan Froyd wrote,
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Lutz Euler <lutz.euler@...> wrote:
> > Maybe we should just make the expected test results dependent on whether
> > the platform is x86 or not. With a bit of multi-precision arithmetic I
> > can build a reducer modulo 2 pi with sufficient precision to replicate
> > the results of the libm range-reduction and thus test that.
> > Just now I see that you enabled the test originally only for x86.
> > So another solution would be just to make the test x86-only again?
> I think marking the test as requiring x86-only weirdness by whatever
> means would be fine.
I have prepared two patches: The first marks the test skipped-on non-x86
and adds a comment as to why, and the second one adds another test,
skipped-on x86, that tests the libm range-reduction.
If no one objects, I will commit both in a few days.