At Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:29:46 +0000, Tasos Drosopoulos wrote: > make[2]: Entering directory `/home/drososa/gsl-1.12/integration' > FAIL: qawc(f459) elist (1.83292424966307774e-15 observed vs > 1.83308294820715351e-15 expected) [744] > FAIL: test > ... > > The error disappears when I compile with CFLAGS="-O" indicating an > overaggressive optimization (perhaps? on the side of the gcc-4.4.1 > compiler). I observed a similar pattern in the past with gcc-4.3.2 which > was fixed with gcc-4.3.3 (the one I am using now for my everyday work). > > If anyone has a Linux system using the same compiler please verify the > above. If the FAIL persists someone should inform the gcc people. I > would like to upgrade to a more recent gcc provided I can still do my > work (based heavily on gsl).
Thanks for the bug report. I don't think this is a bug in GCC, rather the test is probably too strict and doesn't account for differences in the integration algorithm caused by rounding errors and optimisation. We should probably increase the test tolerance on this -- it would be interesting to know exactly where the difference is coming from first though, by comparing all the intermediate results at the two optimisation levels. This should be as simple as putting some breakpoints (or print statements) in qc25c for each computation of abserr. -- Brian Gough (GSL Maintainer) Support freedom by joining the FSF http://www.fsf.org/associate/support_freedom/join_fsf?referrer=37 _______________________________________________ Bug-gsl mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gsl
