Le 15/03/2011 22:47, Francois Bissey a écrit :
> On 14 March 2011 16:40, Julien PUYDT wrote:
> > Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
> >> Perhaps you can find value of n, such that gamma(n) gives an exact
> >> integer result. If that happens on other CPUs too, then I suggest the
> >
> On 14 March 2011 16:40, Julien PUYDT wrote:
> > Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
> >> Perhaps you can find value of n, such that gamma(n) gives an exact
> >> integer result. If that happens on other CPUs too, then I suggest the
> >> argument to the doctest is changed.
> >
> > The sol
On 14 March 2011 16:40, Julien PUYDT wrote:
> Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
>> Perhaps you can find value of n, such that gamma(n) gives an exact
>> integer result. If that happens on other CPUs too, then I suggest the
>> argument to the doctest is changed.
>
> The solution of findi
On Mon, 14 Mar 2011 17:40:41 +0100
Julien PUYDT wrote:
> Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
> >
> > On 14 March 2011 13:04, David Kirkby
> > wrote:
> >> On 13 March 2011 15:34, Julien PUYDT
> >> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> among the few failing tests with my ARM built, two are because o
> On 14 March 2011 16:40, Julien PUYDT wrote:
> > Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
> >
> > The solution of finding a "good" integer is fragile : it will break
> > anytime wind will change direction.
>
> I tend to agree.
>
> > Actually, the best solution is the one I gave : handle fuz
On 14 March 2011 16:40, Julien PUYDT wrote:
> Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
> The solution of finding a "good" integer is fragile : it will break anytime
> wind will change direction.
I tend to agree.
> Actually, the best solution is the one I gave : handle fuzzy results! You
> ha
On Monday, March 14, 2011 9:40:41 AM UTC-7, Snark wrote:
>
> Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a �crit :
>
> Are doctests pure string checks? Can't they allow things like "(result -
> expected) < 0.001" ?
>
Yes and yes. You can certainly have a test like
sage: abs(x-y) < 0.0001
True
Le 14/03/2011 14:12, David Kirkby a écrit :
On 14 March 2011 13:04, David Kirkby wrote:
On 13 March 2011 15:34, Julien PUYDT wrote:
Hi,
among the few failing tests with my ARM built, two are because of accuracy
reasons :
File "/home/jpuydt/sage-4.6.2/devel/sage/sage/functions/other.py", li
On 14 March 2011 13:04, David Kirkby wrote:
> On 13 March 2011 15:34, Julien PUYDT wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> among the few failing tests with my ARM built, two are because of accuracy
>> reasons :
>>
>> File "/home/jpuydt/sage-4.6.2/devel/sage/sage/functions/other.py", line 497:
>> sage: gamma1(floa
On 13 March 2011 15:34, Julien PUYDT wrote:
> Hi,
>
> among the few failing tests with my ARM built, two are because of accuracy
> reasons :
>
> File "/home/jpuydt/sage-4.6.2/devel/sage/sage/functions/other.py", line 497:
> sage: gamma1(float(6))
> Expected:
> 120.0
> Got:
> 119.9
Hi,
among the few failing tests with my ARM built, two are because of
accuracy reasons :
File "/home/jpuydt/sage-4.6.2/devel/sage/sage/functions/other.py", line 497:
sage: gamma1(float(6))
Expected:
120.0
Got:
119.97
File "/home/jpuydt/sage-4.6.2/devel/sage/sage/symbol
11 matches
Mail list logo
