Is it also possible that MaxAbs would be computed wrongly? I get a different value when I compute it myself.
Dominik On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On Jan 4, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Dominik Szczerba <dominik at itis.ethz.ch> >> wrote: >> Do you think this issue can potentially explain a behavior I observe: >> >> In my big block shell matrix there are two blocks submatrices: (say) B >> and B transposed. MaxAbs is exact same for both submatrices, MinAbs is >> zero for B (as expected), but small negative for the other >> (unexpected). >> >> Now question: do I have a bug (that I do not immediately see) or this >> can be hopefully only a trick in MinAbs? >> >> It was a bug in MinAbs. I am pushing the fix. > > ? ?To 3.2 I hope. Please send the patch link for 3.2 as Satish did just a > little while ago for another bug. > > ? Barry > >> >> ? ?Matt >> >> Thanks a lot. >> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:05 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >> > On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:02, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Okay, here is what is wrong with the logic: >> >> >> >> 1) Its not a shift, it ignores values < 1.0e-12 >> > >> > >> > you wrote that in the commit message >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> 2) The problem is on line 2.17 of the diff where it takes the first value >> >> as minimum, but does not take the absolute value >> > >> > >> > good catch >> >> >> >> -- >> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments >> is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments >> lead. >> -- Norbert Wiener >
