Re: [pure-lang-users] Yet another quirk with MinGW

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

> Well, I had to fiddle with the output format some more, since 'make 
> check' would fail on this test due to (more or less) small rounding 
> discrepancies between systems. ("Almost zero" values are particularly 
> nasty.) Therefore I'm rounding floating point numbers to 3 significant 
> digits now, I hope that this is good enough. The latest log can be found 
> here:
> 
> http://pure-lang.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pure-lang/pure/trunk/test/test020.log

If you want to give a helping hand checking some of the results, it's 
actually easier to just run test020.pure interactively yourself. That 
also gives you the opportunity to rerun the tests after changing the 
printed precision of results, like so:

let double_format = "%#0.6g"; tests;

In the meantime I also checked some of the complex operations manually 
against my HP-50G calculator, whose numeric algorithms are based on 
earlier HP calculator software designed by William Kahan, so they should 
be pretty much standard. ;-) All bad branch cuts I noticed are corrected 
now, so that math.pure now shows pretty much the same results as the 
calculator (up to rounding). That gives me some confidence that the 
definitions in math.pure actually work now. :)

I also added the type guards necessary to ensure that symbolic terms 
involving these operations are irreducible, so that all math.pure 
functions and operators can be extended as necessary later.

This is all in svn now, so I guess it's release time. :) A bit late 
tonight, but tomorrow...

Cheers,
Albert

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag