Got some warnings that probably should be checked out:

Core.xs:718:9: warning: implicit declaration of function 
'_anyval_eq_anyval' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
simq.c:81:3: warning: implicit declaration of function 'puts' 
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
resample.c:292:2: warning: implicit declaration of function 'strcmp' 
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
Slatec.xs:11359:21: warning: implicit declaration of function 'polfit_' 
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
Slatec.xs:11767:21: warning: implicit declaration of function 'dpolft_' 
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
INTEG.xs:18122:10: warning: implicit declaration of function 'warn' 
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]


On 9/30/2015 07:37, Chris Marshall wrote:
> Looking at the CPAN Testers reports:
> - many FAILs from t/bigmem.t running because AUTOMATED_TESTING is not set
> - fails for 'long double' perls as reported by Rob
> - some UNKNOWN from compiler error for FreeBSD 10.1-release
>
> With a fix for long double and making t/bigmem.t run on request
> only should resolve most of the test failures reported so far.
>
> --Chris
>
> On 9/30/2015 06:53, Chris Marshall wrote:
>> Adding a case to allow "long double" to "double"
>> before the croak should fix the problem.
>>
>> Recommendations?
>>
>> --Chris
>>
>> On 9/30/2015 06:49, Chris Marshall wrote:
>>> Hi Rob-
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reports.  This did not occur for
>>> PDL-2.013 because the logic for 64bit index support
>>> was not complete.  What I think is happening is
>>> that perl values are being converted in the
>>> typemap which assumes that PDL_Double is capable
>>> of representing any floating point type.
>>>
>>> For the case of long double -> double conversion,
>>> this is not the case.  I don't think we want to
>>> try to add long double to the PDL-2.x types but
>>> we do need to decide how to handle the conversion
>>> process and possible loss of precision or range.
>>>
>>> --Chris
>>>
>>> On 9/30/2015 04:23, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: [email protected]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:28 AM
>>>> To: Chris Marshall ; perldl
>>>> Subject: Re: [Pdl-general] CHM/PDL-2.013_01.tar.gz uploaded to CPAN
>>>>
>>>>> There's also problems with my long double builds of perl on Windows.
>>>>
>>>> No problems when nvtype is "double".
>>>>
>>>> 45 of the test scripts are failing because whichdatatype_double(), 
>>>> which is found in Basic/Core/pdlcore.c, croaks when called with an 
>>>> argument whose finite floating point decimal value cannot be 
>>>> expressed exactly in base 2.:
>>>>
>>>> Something's gone wrong: 0.000000 cannot be converted by 
>>>> whichdatatype_double at C:\sisyphusion\PDL-2.013_01\blib\lib/PDL/
>>>>
>>>> (The arg is not zero - it's just that "%lf" does not display the 
>>>> correct value.)
>>>>
>>>> whichdatatype_double looks like:
>>>>
>>>> ##########################
>>>> int pdl_whichdatatype_double (NV nv) {
>>>>        TESTTYPE(PDL_F,PDL_Float)
>>>>        TESTTYPE(PDL_D,PDL_Double)
>>>>
>>>>        if( !finite(nv) ) { return PDL_D; }
>>>>        croak("Something's gone wrong: %lf cannot be converted by 
>>>> whichdatatype_double",
>>>>                nv);
>>>> }
>>>> ##########################
>>>>
>>>> where TESTTYPE is defined as:
>>>> #define TESTTYPE(b,a) {a foo = nv; if(nv == foo) return b;}
>>>>
>>>> Given that PDL_Float is 4 bytes, PDL_Double is 8 bytes and NV is 16 
>>>> bytes, it should come as no surprise that TESTTYPE should fail to 
>>>> return for any finite floating point decimal value that cannot be 
>>>> expressed exactly in base 2.
>>>>
>>>> However, the reason that 2.013 succeeds for nvtype='long double' is 
>>>> that whichdatatype_double() simply does NOT get called at any stage 
>>>> (during the running of its test suite, at least) .
>>>>
>>>> So ... the question becomes "Why does the PDL-2.013_01 test suite 
>>>> call whichdatatype_double() at least 45 times when the nvtype is 
>>>> 'long double' ?"
>>>>
>>>> This is not a Windows-only issue. There aren't many cpan-testers 
>>>> running -Duselongdouble builds, but there's a report from one at:
>>>> http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/3b328b0e-66d3-11e5-a1a3-e32696b0373b
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> and the same thing is happening there.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Rob
>>>
>>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
pdl-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general

Reply via email to