Re: [Maxima-discuss] Maxima works with gcl 2.7.1

[David S. <d.s...@go...>]

That's great news!
Increasing numerical thresholds should not be a problem, the differences
are probably due to a different order of floating point operations. By the
way, some other Lisps also fail a few numerical tests, IIRC.

I still haven't been able to build GCL on my Ubuntu 22.04.5 system. The
2.7.1 source distribution (after patching as described on the website)
leads to one error, trying to build from the current Git master leads to
another error. Raymond, could you share your GCL build procedure?

Raymond Toy <toy...@gm...> schrieb am Mi., 23. Apr. 2025, 21:58:

> Thanks to Victor’s recent changes, I was able to compile Maxima with gcl
> 2.7.1. There are lots of warnings now about how the function signature has
> changed. I assume this is because we call the functions before they were
> defined.
>
> Anyway, the testsuite runs and produces 3 errors:
>
>
> Error summary:
> Error(s) found:
>   /home/toy/src/sourceforge/maxima/tests/rtest_elliptic.mac problem:
>     (232)
>   /home/toy/src/sourceforge/maxima/tests/rtest_hg.mac problems:
>     (98 101)
> 3 tests failed out of 14,151 total tests.
>
> I think gcl 2.6.14 passed the testsuite without any errors. For test 232
> in rtest_elliptic, we need to increase the threshold from 5.4673E-16 to
> 1.0990647210786426E-15. This is reasonable.
>
> Not sure what’s going on with the failures in rtest_hg.
>
> In any case, this is really good news! Thanks Victor for the fixes and
> Camm for the updated gcl!
> &#8203;
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima-discuss mailing list
> Max...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/maxima-discuss
>