使用泰勒级数，试着找出级数项之间的关系这样你就不用一遍又一遍地计算了

下面是一个关于余窦的例子:

double cosinus(double x, double prec)
{
    double t, s ;
    int p;
    p = 0;
    s = 1.0;
    t = 1.0;
    while(fabs(t/s) > prec)
    {
        p++;
        t = (-t * x * x) / ((2 * p - 1) * (2 * p));
        s += t;
    }
    return s;
}

使用这个，我们可以得到新的和项使用已经使用的和项(我们避免阶乘和x2p)

是的，也有计算罪恶的软件算法。基本上，用数字计算机计算这些东西通常是用数值方法来完成的，比如近似表示函数的泰勒级数。

数值方法可以将函数近似到任意精度，因为浮点数的精度是有限的，所以它们非常适合这些任务。

如果你想犯罪

 __asm__ __volatile__("fsin" : "=t"(vsin) : "0"(xrads));

如果你想的话，因为

 __asm__ __volatile__("fcos" : "=t"(vcos) : "0"(xrads));

如果你想要根号方根

 __asm__ __volatile__("fsqrt" : "=t"(vsqrt) : "0"(value));

那么，既然机器指令可以做到，为什么还要使用不准确的代码呢?

没有什么比点击源代码，看看人们是如何在常用的库中实际完成它的了;让我们特别看看一个C库实现。我选择了uLibC。

这是sin函数:

http://git.uclibc.org/uClibc/tree/libm/s_sin.c

看起来它处理了一些特殊情况，然后执行一些参数约简，将输入映射到范围[-pi/4,pi/4]，(将参数分成两部分，一个大的部分和一个尾巴)，然后调用

http://git.uclibc.org/uClibc/tree/libm/k_sin.c

然后作用于这两个部分。 如果没有尾巴，则使用13次多项式生成近似答案。 如果有尾巴，根据sin(x+y) = sin(x) + sin'(x')y的原理，你会得到一个小的修正

这是一个复杂的问题。x86家族的类似intel的CPU有一个sin()函数的硬件实现，但它是x87 FPU的一部分，不再用于64位模式(使用SSE2寄存器代替)。在这种模式下，使用软件实现。

有几个这样的实现。一个在fdlibm中，在Java中使用。据我所知，glibc实现包含fdlibm的部分，以及IBM贡献的其他部分。

先验函数的软件实现，如sin()，通常使用多项式逼近，通常从泰勒级数获得。

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。