Hi, I'm using the Intel Compiler since they produce faster code in many cases. Let me know if i should try to find out more informations, otherwise i'll live with it :-)
Thanks for your help. -- Stefan Gerlach > At Thu, 3 Apr 2008 11:33:00 +0200, > Stefan Gerlach wrote: > > compiling gsl-1.11 on openSUSE 10.2 (x86_64) with Intel C Compiler 10 i get > > the following problems during make check : > > > > ... > > FAIL: gsl_sf_angle_restrict_symm_err_e(-1e9, &r) [2769] > > expected: -5.7739542350138517e-01 > > obtained: -5.7739543914794922e-01 +/- 4.4408920959364753e-07 > > (rel=7.69124e-07) > > fracdiff: 1.3549262078941325e-08 > > tolerance: 3.5527136788005009e-15 > > value not within tolerance of expected value > > -5.773954391479492188e-01 4.440892095936475318e-07 > > FAIL: gsl_angle_restrict_pos_e: theta = 50000.0 + 1.0/65536.0 [2775] > > FAIL: gsl_angle_restrict_pos_e: theta = 5000000.0 + 1.0/65536.0 [2776] > > FAIL: gsl_angle_restrict_symm_e: theta = 50000.0 + 1.0/65536.0 [2782] > > FAIL: Trigonometric and Related Functions [2783] > > FAIL: test > > =================== > > 1 of 1 tests failed > > =================== > > > > this is the last of a long list of failed tests in specfunc/ > > Thanks for your email. > > Most likely many of the failures are errors just above the test limit. > > In test_sf.h you'll find two factors > > #define TEST_FACTOR 100.0 > #define TEST_SIGMA 1.5 > > If you increase these you may find that some of the errors go away. > > In the example above, it looks like the formula in > gsl_sf_angle_restrict_symm_err_e has broken down and caused a loss of > precision. That could be a problem with the compiler. If you used > optimisation you could try compiling without optimisation. As icc is > proprietary software I don't run any tests with it myself, only gcc. >
pgprcNqNkU0eF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-gsl mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gsl
