On 14 August 2012 20:02, Mike Miller <mtmil...@ieee.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Carnë Draug wrote: >> On 9 August 2012 03:11, Mike Miller <mtmil...@ieee.org> wrote: >>> >>> Finally got back to this, it's now closer to what you showed here. >>> It's clear that Matlab is forcing the 4th argument to always be a >>> power of 2, even though that's not in the help text. I implemented >>> that, added an error message for the case of the argument being too >>> small (after conversion to a power of 2), and added a test case based >>> on your examples above. Thanks for those! >> >> Hi Mike >> >> I have just noticed that this introduced another bug (which I think >> was already there before, this just made it more apparent. For >> example, if the minimum value for 4th argument is more than the >> default, it also automatically (and silently) increases though I'm not >> sure for how much. For example: > > Thanks for checking, I'll take a look at this again today when I get > back to my dev box. > >>>> f = [0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 1]; m = [0 0 1 1 0 0]; >>>> bdef = fir2(1024, f, m); >> >> should make the 4th argument default to 512 which would be too low and >> return an error (current behaviour with Octave). However, this does >> not happen in Matlab. But if the default value is specified, then it >> gives an error. And it doesn't default to the next possible value >> (1024) as I first expected, it defaults to 2048. >> >> [...] >> >> Let me know if you need more tests. > > Yes, can you repeat your tests using 1023 and 2047 instead? The limit > is calculated based on the length of the filter which is order+1, I > think that's why you're seeing it go up to the next power of two. > > bdef = fir2(1023, f, m); > b512 = fir2(1023, f, m, 512); % should not error now
Yes, it doesn't give an error. > b1024 = fir2(1023, f, m, 1024); > isequal(bdef, b512) % should be true No, it's false > bdef = fir2(2047, f, m); > b1024 = fir2(2047, f, m, 1024); > isequal(bdef, b1024) % should be true No. Also false. > Have you done any comparison of the actual resulting filter against > what Matlab returns? Nop. This matlab it's not on my system, and the one where it is doesn't have Octave, so it's a bit of a bum to go around with saved files between the two. > If you have patience for any more, I can come up with some tests to > verify the 5th argument too. Sure, no problem. Give me whatever tests you need and I'll run them. Same for other functions of the package or if you want to take a closer look at differences between results. Carnë ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
