Unittest tester.

[Iain Buclaw]

On 17 May 2013 21:09, Johannes Pfau <nospam at example.com> wrote:

> Am Tue, 14 May 2013 18:59:14 +0200
> schrieb "Iain Buclaw" <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com>:
>
> > We now have 6 currently failing unittests.
> >
> > Current failing unittests:
> >
> > core.exception.AssertError at libphobos
> /src/std/internal/math/errorfunction.d(222):
> > unittest failure
> > core.exception.AssertError at libphobos
> /src/std/internal/math/gammafunction.d(367):
> > unittest failure
>
> At least the second problem is caused by a difference in the exp inline
> asm version used in dmd and the core.stdc.math.expl function used in
> gdc. At first I though the iasm version might be more precise,
> especially as we just alias expl(real) to exp(double).
>
> But a short test with mathematica suggests that the iasm version is
> less precise (or even wrong?) and the numbers where determined with the
> iasm version, so it seems this is 'not our bug'. I guess I'll have to
> ask Don about this right?
>
> http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/5b33b8ad
>
>
You will also find that be behaviour matches core.stdc.exp2l(LOG2E*x);

http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/bb319763

-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/d.gnu/attachments/20130518/c297a018/attachment.html>