Re: Some comments on the ansi test suite

On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:38:28AM -0400, Raymond Toy wrote:
>     Peter> These are part of the less useful history of ansi-test. It came from an
>     Peter> implementation that seems to have had its share of numeric bugs. So
>     Peter> there are a lot of simple tests like this. Of course they fall on their
>     Peter> face the moment you change fp format... 
> 
> What do you propose?  Leave them?  Remove them?  Change them to be be
> an approximately equal type of test instead of equality?

Replace them with a better test would be nice. As most of them are fp
problems we should (IMHO) replace them with "zero knowledge" tests or
remove them.

>     Peter> I suppose both. The value of tests like that is pretty low. However
>     Peter> think about the 
>     Peter> * (/ 1 (/ 3 2) 0)
> 
>     Peter> 1/0
> 
>     Peter> bug in cmucl...
> 
> This is fixed in CVS, as you probably know.

Sorry I was unclear: I meant that stupid nummerical test can sometimes
show bugs even when you would expect that serious implementations have
bug-free nummerical libraries... But sometimes reality is not what we
expect.

Groetjes, Peter

-- 
It's logic Jim, but not as we know it. | [email protected]
"God, root, what is difference?" - Pitr|
"God is more forgiving." - Dave Aronson| http://cvs2.cons.org/~pvaneynd/


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Stuff, things, and much much more.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf