On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Anne Archibald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/5/24 Charles R Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I take that back, I got confused looking through the output. The errors > are > > the same and only seem to happen when valgrind runs the tests. > > Sounds like maybe valgrind is not IEEE clean: > > """ > As of version 3.0.0, Valgrind has the following limitations in its > implementation of x86/AMD64 floating point relative to IEEE754. > """ > + > """ > Numeric exceptions in FP code: IEEE754 defines five types of numeric > exception that can happen: invalid operation (sqrt of negative number, > etc), division by zero, overflow, underflow, inexact (loss of > precision). > > For each exception, two courses of action are defined by IEEE754: > either (1) a user-defined exception handler may be called, or (2) a > default action is defined, which "fixes things up" and allows the > computation to proceed without throwing an exception. > > Currently Valgrind only supports the default fixup actions. Again, > feedback on the importance of exception support would be appreciated. > > When Valgrind detects that the program is trying to exceed any of > these limitations (setting exception handlers, rounding mode, or > precision control), it can print a message giving a traceback of where > this has happened, and continue execution. This behaviour used to be > the default, but the messages are annoying and so showing them is now > disabled by default. Use --show-emwarns=yes to see them. > """ > Thanks for following that up, Anne. Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
