Let me know if you want me to break anything else. My mom always hated it when I was a kid, but it seems to be useful on pre-releases.
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > Fixed. > > Some unsafe primitives were marked internally as "functional", but this > annotation was used with two different interpretations: sometimes as > "non-mutating", sometimes as "always produces the same result". The > `unsafe-vector-ref' primitive was marked as "functional" with the > former intent, but the compiler could use the latter interpretation to > move it past an `unsafe-vector-set!'. The solution, of course, is to > have two distinct annotations. > > At Sun, 9 Oct 2011 15:02:13 -0600, Doug Williams wrote: > > I reloaded the older version of Racket on my Windows 7 computer and the > > radix-2 FFTs run fine there. I also tested both versions on my Macbook > Pro > > (32 bit) and got the same behavior - correct results (plots) on 5.1.2 and > > bad radix-2 results (plots) on 5.1.900.1. > > code for the mixed-radix and radix-2. So, it isn't limited to Windows 7 > or > > 64-bit. > > > > Doug > > > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Doug Williams > > <m.douglas.willi...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > I downloaded the latest pre-release version (5.1.900.1) to update the > > > science collection to use the new plot collection. The good news is > that > > > that went very smoothly. The bad news is that some of my FFT routines > seem > > > to be getting incorrect numeric results - at least the plots are very > bad. > > > But, since all of the other plots seem fine, I don't see why these > would be > > > any different. > > > > > > So, I suspect that something has changed that affects the numeric > > > calculations. It is just the radix-2 FFTs that are having the problem. > They > > > do some low-level bit fiddling to do the in-place butterfly addressing > for > > > the FFTs - using things like unsafe-fxlshift (which just looks > unfriendly) - > > > so, I suspect something there. Are the any recent changes that would > affect > > > these kinds of fixed-point operations? > > > > > > I've run the code under a previous version of Racket on a 64-bit Linux > > > (Scientific Linux 6.0) computer and a 32-bit Windows XP computer and > get > > > correct results. So, I don't think it is simply a 32/64 bit problem - > unless > > > it is limited to 64-bit Windows. > > > > > > Sorry that was kind of rambling and non-specific, but I was wondering > where > > > to start looking at the problem or what would help someone else look > into > > > it. > > > > > > Doug > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Ryan Culpepper <r...@cs.utah.edu> > wrote: > > > > > >> The release process for v5.2 has begun: the `release' branch was > > >> created for any work that is left and is now bumped to v5.1.90. You > > >> can go on using the `master' branch as usual, it is now bumped to > > >> v5.2.0.1 (to avoid having two different trees with the same version). > > >> > > >> If you have any bug-fixes and changes that need to go in the release > > >> then make sure to specify that in the commit message or mail me the > > >> commit SHA1s. You can `git checkout release' to try it out directly > if > > >> needed -- but do not try to push commits on it (the server will forbid > > >> it). > > >> > > >> Please make sure that code that you're responsible for is as stable > > >> as possible, and let me know if there is any new work that should > > >> not be included in this release. > > >> > > >> >> NOW IS THE TIME TO FIX BUGS THAT YOU KNOW ABOUT <<< > > >> > > >> The time between the `release' branch creation and the actual > > >> release is for fixing new errors that prevent proper functioning of > > >> major components and that show up during the preparation for a > > >> release. You can also finalize piece of work that is not yet > > >> complete, but please avoid merging new features. > > >> > > >> Note that nightly builds will go on as usual (as v5.2.0.1), and > > >> pre-release builds will be available shortly at > > >> > > >> http://pre.racket-lang.org/release/ > > >> > > >> Please tell me if you think that this release is significant enough > > >> that it should be announced on the users list for wider testing. > > >> -- > > >> Ryan Culpepper > > >> _________________________________________________ > > >> For list-related administrative tasks: > > >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev > > >> > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________ > > For list-related administrative tasks: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev >
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
