OK kiddies, time for the pros.... This is one of my biggest complaints with inexperienced software engineers. They come in calculating transcendental functions from scratch (using Taylor's series) as if nobody had ever done these calculations before in their lives. Not true. This is a well defined problem and has been approached thousands of times by very clever software and hardware engineers and has a well defined solution. Basically, most of the transcendental functions use Chebyshev Polynomials to calculate them. As to which polynomials are used depends on the circumstances. First, the bible on this matter is a book called "Computer Approximations" by Hart and Cheney. In that book, you can decide if you have a hardware adder, multiplier, divider, etc, and decide which operations are fastest. e.g. If you had a really fast divider, the fastest way to calculate sine might be P1(x)/P2(x) where P1, P2 are Chebyshev polynomials. Without the fast divider, it might be just P(x), where P has much more terms than P1 or P2....so it'd be slower. So, first step is to determine your hardware and what it can do. Then you choose the appropriate combination of Chebyshev polynomials (is usually of the form cos(ax) = aP(x) for cosine for example, again where P is a Chebyshev polynomial). Then you decide what decimal precision you want. e.g. if you want 7 digits precision, you look that up in the appropriate table in the book I mentioned, and it will give you (for precision = 7.33) a number N = 4 and a polynomial number 3502. N is the order of the polynomial (so it's p4.x^4 + p3.x^3 + p2.x^2 + p1.x + p0), because N=4. Then you look up the actual value of the p4,p3,p2,p1,p0 values in the back of the book under 3502 (they'll be in floating point). Then you implement your algorithm in software in the form: (((p4.x + p3).x + p2).x + p1).x + p0 ....and this is how you'd calculate cosine to 7 decimal places on that hardware.

请注意，在FPU中大多数硬件实现的超越操作通常涉及一些微码和类似的操作(取决于硬件)。 切比雪夫多项式用于大多数先验多项式，但不是全部。例:使用Newton raphson方法的两次迭代，首先使用查询表，使用平方根更快。 同样，《计算机逼近》这本书会告诉你。

If you plan on implmementing these functions, I'd recommend to anyone that they get a copy of that book. It really is the bible for these kinds of algorithms. Note that there are bunches of alternative means for calculating these values like cordics, etc, but these tend to be best for specific algorithms where you only need low precision. To guarantee the precision every time, the chebyshev polynomials are the way to go. Like I said, well defined problem. Has been solved for 50 years now.....and thats how it's done.

Now, that being said, there are techniques whereby the Chebyshev polynomials can be used to get a single precision result with a low degree polynomial (like the example for cosine above). Then, there are other techniques to interpolate between values to increase the accuracy without having to go to a much larger polynomial, such as "Gal's Accurate Tables Method". This latter technique is what the post referring to the ACM literature is referring to. But ultimately, the Chebyshev Polynomials are what are used to get 90% of the way there.

享受。

在GNU libm中，sin的实现依赖于系统。因此，您可以在sysdeps的适当子目录中找到每个平台的实现。

一个目录包含一个由IBM贡献的C语言实现。自2011年10月以来，这是在典型的x86-64 Linux系统上调用sin()时实际运行的代码。它显然比汇编指令中的f_f快。源代码:sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64/s_sin.c，查找__sin (double x)。

这段代码非常复杂。没有一种软件算法在整个x值范围内尽可能快且准确，因此库实现了几种不同的算法，它的第一项工作是查看x并决定使用哪种算法。

When x is very very close to 0, sin(x) == x is the right answer. A bit further out, sin(x) uses the familiar Taylor series. However, this is only accurate near 0, so... When the angle is more than about 7°, a different algorithm is used, computing Taylor-series approximations for both sin(x) and cos(x), then using values from a precomputed table to refine the approximation. When |x| > 2, none of the above algorithms would work, so the code starts by computing some value closer to 0 that can be fed to sin or cos instead. There's yet another branch to deal with x being a NaN or infinity.

这段代码使用了一些我以前从未见过的数值技巧，尽管据我所知，它们可能在浮点专家中很有名。有时几行代码需要几段文字来解释。例如，这两条线

double t = (x * hpinv + toint);
double xn = t - toint;

(有时)用于将x减小到接近0的值，该值与x相差π/2的倍数，特别是xn × π/2。这种没有划分或分支的方式相当聪明。但是没有任何评论!

旧的32位版本的GCC/glibc使用fsin指令，这对于某些输入是非常不准确的。有一篇精彩的博客文章用两行代码说明了这一点。

fdlibm在纯C中实现sin要比glibc简单得多，而且注释很好。源代码:fdlibm/s_sin.c和fdlibm/k_sin.c

不要用泰勒级数。切比雪夫多项式更快更准确，正如上面几个人指出的那样。下面是一个实现(最初来自ZX Spectrum ROM): https://albertveli.wordpress.com/2015/01/10/zx-sine/

如果您想查看这些函数在C语言中的实际GNU实现，请查看glibc的最新主干。参见GNU C库。

库函数的实际实现取决于特定的编译器和/或库提供程序。不管它是用硬件还是软件，不管它是不是泰勒展开，等等，都会有所不同。

我意识到这完全没有帮助。

像正弦和余弦这样的函数是在微处理器内部的微码中实现的。例如，英特尔芯片就有相应的组装指令。C编译器将生成调用这些汇编指令的代码。(相反，Java编译器不会。Java在软件而不是硬件中计算三角函数，因此运行速度要慢得多。)

芯片不使用泰勒级数来计算三角函数，至少不完全是这样。首先，他们使用CORDIC，但他们也可能使用一个短的泰勒级数来优化CORDIC的结果，或者用于特殊情况，例如在非常小的角度下以相对较高的精度计算正弦。有关更多解释，请参阅StackOverflow的回答。