Re: dc command

On Tuesday 17 September 2013, Felix Salfelder wrote:
> also, the initial op has control 1, not 0 (1=scUSER looks
> better to me), so the tests still 'fail'.

That's what I meant by "questionable" .. different but not 
necessarily wrong.

The old code didn't have that feature, so dc had stepcause 
always 0.

On Tuesday 17 September 2013, Felix Salfelder wrote:
> > Questionable regressions:
> > Some tests, most notably trcurve*, give different
> > results.  At  first glance, the differences seem
> > insignificant, might be an improvement, but this needs to
> > be explained.
> 
> the initial guess is different. in non pathological cases
> this guess it closer, but that doesnt mean the accepted
> solution will be better...

need to examine closely.  Likely, new and old could be equally 
good, both within tolerance, so the regression test just says 
that something changed.