[Gsll-devel] Status of status.text

[Mirko Vukovic]

You deserve a medal, a GP (giga pint) of some favorite beverage, or
some other token of our appreciation.

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Liam Healy <lhealy at common-lisp.net> wrote:
> Yeah status.text is way out of date, at the very least there are 4000+
> tests now, not ~1200.
>
> Most of the recent changes have been to consolidate foreign array
> handling into GSD, based on static-vectors where available.  On
> the surface there isn't much change, but internally there are substantial
> changes as you've noticed.  The major benefit from a user's perspective
> is that it should be a lot easier to use grids in different libraries, say
> computing an array in GSL and passing it to another foreign library.
>
> As for the two errors you are seeing, these are exactly the errors
> I see.  The basic problem with the test suite is that most of it was
> made up by me without proper epsilons.  After I discovered that GSL
> had a complete suite of tests, I started porting those tests, and they
> include an epsilon for all float results.  Therefore, if one of those tests
> fails then it ought to fail in GSL too.
>
> So the sensible thing is to eliminate my made-up tests and replace them
> with the GSL tests.  That's what really needs to be done with those
> failing tests.  That's the long-range plan, but it's very tedious work, so
> I will put a burst of effort in and then get fed up with it.  That
> happened in early June, and is the reason the number of tests grew by
> ~2000; my meager random distribution tests were failing so I did
> a wholesale port of the GSL tests.
>
> Liam
>
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Jason Nielsen <jdn at math.carleton.ca> wrote:
>> Dear Liam,
>>
>> I just pulled the latest version of gsll.  Apparently you have busy as
>> there are quite a few changes.  That is great, keep up the good work!
>>
>> With all the recent e-mail on the test suite I'm wondering how up to date
>> is the status.text file?  When I run the test suite on an x86-64 box
>> running Ubuntu 10.04 with SBCL 1.0.39 and a custom built gsl library
>> (mostly some CFLAGS tweaks) I get the following two failures:
>>
>> EXPONENTIAL: (MULTIPLE-VALUE-LIST
>>               (LET ((RNG (MAKE-RANDOM-NUMBER-GENERATOR +MT19937+ 0)))
>>                 (LOOP FOR I FROM 0 TO 10
>>                       COLLECT (SAMPLE RNG :EXPONENTIAL :MU 10.0d0))))
>> failed:
>> Expected ((0.0025828444588394794d0 18.145581427987647d0
>>            12.636598054339759d0 0.5424387252062355d0 14.624994234158105d0
>>            7.236607929535993d0 0.4345362449683603d0 2.95303920904529d0
>>            6.161052939065796d0 3.011686333539114d0 2.7451079819355364d0))
>> but saw ((82.61578216370394d0 1.77823538531874d0 3.3214653339021365d0
>>           29.412645812312775d0 2.6351843583734817d0 6.635371453335953d0
>>           31.57709150859036d0 13.637712930094189d0 7.766237034468241d0
>>           13.468928238240315d0 14.268822088229632d0))
>> EXPONENTIAL: 11 assertions passed, 1 failed.
>>
>> and:
>>
>> LU: (MULTIPLE-VALUE-LIST (TEST-LU-SOLVE-DIM (CREATE-COMPLEX-MATRIX 7)))
>> failed:
>> Expected (#2m(#C(24.0717272023734d0 -9.84612797621247d0)
>>               #C(-269.338853034031d0 87.5455232472528d0)
>>               #C(2966.61356736296d0 -1026.24473923993d0)
>>               #C(-18207.3812124749d0 5673.8447304241d0)
>>               #C(55769.3879019068d0 -16154.0963210502d0)
>>               #C(-78894.1207561151d0 19505.3812987858d0)
>>               #C(39554.8551241728d0 -7765.93696255317d0)))
>> but saw (#2m(#C(-81.70598196064235d0 -81.70599595009693d0)
>>              #C(3354.209927435102d0 3354.278264591346d0)
>>              #C(-31954.85554225817d0 -31956.353685805567d0)
>>              #C(119027.61090077131d0 119037.36678048137d0)
>>              #C(-203627.71695137964d0 -203653.92708809028d0)
>>              #C(160626.5466779804d0 160657.2640539496d0)
>>              #C(-47344.00882810219d0 -47357.00253607087d0)))
>> LU: 11 assertions passed, 1 failed.
>>
>> TOTAL: 4014 assertions passed, 2 failed, 0 execution errors.
>>
>> a few quick tests of the LU decomp routine seem to suggest that it is
>> working fine so I'm wondering if this is the kind of "numeric fuzz" you
>> were alluding to in a previous post.
>>
>> With regards,
>> Jason
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gsll-devel mailing list
>> Gsll-devel at common-lisp.net
>> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gsll-devel
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gsll-devel mailing list
> Gsll-devel at common-lisp.net
> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gsll-devel
>